East Boston man charged with raping girl under 14, making child porn

A Suffolk County grand jury yesterday indicted Domenic D'Amore, 29, on numerous charges related to sex with children and making and distributing pornographic images of children, the Suffolk County District Attorney's office reports.

The indictment charges D'Amore with three counts of indecent assault and battery on a child under 14, four counts of trafficking in persons for sexual servitude, four counts of dissemination of matter harmful to a minor, three counts of posing a child in a state of nudity, eight counts of dissemination of child pornography, two counts of possession of child pornography, and two counts of possession with intent to distribute child pornography.

According to the DA's office:

The charges stem from an investigation that began in December when workers at a Revere pawn shop notified Revere Police that they found images depicting child pornography on a phone that the defendant sold at the business. A forensic examination of that phone and a second phone belonging to the defendant revealed hundreds of graphic images and videos of children being sexually abused or posed in a sexual manner. Prosecutors said that the defendant had shared and received similar graphic images through the Kik app on multiple occasions, including a single day in November during which he allegedly shared at least 75 files containing child pornography. Detectives also became aware that an email service provider filed two CyberTips with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children that each report separate instances of images identified as child pornography being uploaded to an email account. Police determined that the email account belonged to the defendant.

In messages sent on Kik, the defendant allegedly made statements that he had sexually abused a young child who was known to him. The child underwent a forensic interview at the Children’s Advocacy Center of Suffolk County and disclosed abuse by the defendant.

He is also charged with trafficking in persons for sexual servitude for allegedly enticing a teenage victim to create child pornography. In a text exchange discovered on a second phone belonging to the defendant, he allegedly made statements offering to pay the victim in return for sexual images and acts and instructed the teen to pose nude in photos. In addition to receiving those photographs from the victim, the defendant is also accused of sending sexual images to the child.

Innocent, etc.

Neighborhoods: 

Topics: 

Ad:

Comments

do we need to know what app they use?

By on

Agreed, I'm glad the scumbag is caught but he only got caught because of his own stupidity selling his old phone. But knowing what app that allows this to flourish undetected, seems like it is more informative for those that may want to do the same than it is necessary for the public to know.

up
Voting closed 5

Is that your attempt at a joke?

I can't tell. But I also can't relate to a tepid attempt at a joke being your first reaction...to a story about child sexual exploitation and rape.

Anyway, I empathize a lot with folks (like forensic examiners) who have tough, traumatizing jobs like this.

Necessary but tough work.

up
Voting closed 5

not joking....

By on

I'm concerned that publishing the app name may make it easier for others to do the same. I don't know how that could perceived as a joke.

up
Voting closed 15

[Blueface voice] yeah, aight

Your comment doesn't strike me as sincere (mostly prurient and snarky) but hey: I'm not the Sincerity Police or anything.

Facts don't care about feelings. One of the facts of this case is that the Kik app was used.

If anything, these companies (like Kik) might have the incentive to change their apps and curb this kind of criminal behavior happening on the app.

I mean, if you are truly that concerned about preventing the spread of child pornography then perhaps look into a career in law enforcement?

[Biggie Smalls voice] Don't be mad, the FBI is hiring (I think).

up
Voting closed 4

The self righteous uhub commenter

By on

No surprise there. Didn't see any jokes in his comment. He just asked a question. I suspect people who would do something as heinous as this would already know which apps they could use. The most important part of this story is the guy got caught, and hopefully some of the people he was sharing this stuff with get caught too.

up
Voting closed 8

No, I handled that debate already

By on

The UHub comment community, I 'love' it but you can tell which stories will get the most traction, think anything related to bikes vs cars, or local politics. And if you ask any question, no matter how tame, you'll be accused of making a joke or worse. The guy/woman asked what value naming the app he used had, how is that a (bad) joke?

up
Voting closed 3

The app Kik used in this case

is a fact of this case.

Take the evidence in the case of that man accused of filming students in the Boston Latin School.

I'm sure no parent would want to view videos of their kids being sexually exploited...but the parents being able to identify their children helped established the FACTS of the case.

Facts don't care about feelings, bruh.

up
Voting closed 4

The Law

By on

So your question is irrelevant.

While I 100% agree that what was going on isn't right. The law says differently currently.

The app just provides a medium for users to connect. WHAT they connect with is entirely up to them. Law protects the app as a medium of free speech.

Of course the catch 22 is that if ILLEGAL activity on the site. Is it up to the app to report it? That has been battled out in the courts, but typically no.

It sucks. It 100% sucks. But it applies to ALL websites and applications such as Facebook. Twitter, Instagram, Grindr, BostonGlobe, and yes, even Universal Hub.

up
Voting closed 8

SESTA? FOSTA? Basta!

All the free speech warriors (on this site and elsewhere) rarely ever mention SESTA/FOSTA.

Those laws have resulted in serious free speech infringement (censorship). Now apps and websites are being held liable for third-party content.

And why don't Free Speech Warriors™ have anything critical to say of SESTA/FOSTA?

Because those laws first began targeting consensual sex workers.

up
Voting closed 4

You're right

By on

Amazingly you're right. At least about SESTA/FOSTA.

Those laws DO keep websites and apps held liable.

My bad, my information is slightly dated now since I no longer work a website that had to deal with this stuff on a daily basis.

up
Voting closed 3

The victim will carry this

By on

The victim will carry this with them for a long time. My sincere empathy goes to them. I have known people in similar situations.

as for the rapist, I hope we can figure out whats wrong with these people and what makes them act the way they do.

up
Voting closed 0