Federal appeals court upholds Kokomo man's sextortion conviction

Dec. 1—A federal appeals court recently ruled against a Kokomo man who appealed his sextortion scheme conviction.

The United States Court of of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in an opinion filed Nov. 23 affirmed Bradley Cox's convictions of extortion, production and attempted production of child pornography and receipt of child pornography by denying his claims that his Fourth, Fifth and Sixth amendment rights were violated and that the government's evidence against him was not sufficient to support his convictions.

Cox was found guilty in December 2020 by a jury on charges related to a sextortion scheme in which he hacked Facebook accounts, obtained nude and explicit photos of people and then threatened to publish them online unless the subjects in the photos sent more nude photos and videos to him. Cox chose to represent himself during the trial.

He was sentenced to 35 years in prison, followed by 20 years of supervised release, and was ordered to pay $3,000 in restitution.

According to court documents, one of Cox's victims was a 15-year-old girl from Marion. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the minor sent Cox multiple explicit photos and videos between February 2018 and April 2018. In an interview with investigators, the 15-year-old said she continued to comply with Cox's demands because of the threats Cox made.

According to court documents, Cox, at least once, did follow up on his threats and posted an explicit photo of one of his victims to a public website.

In his appeal of the convictions filed in September, Cox argued that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated when FBI agents searched his work computer without a warrant and that the district court should have not allowed any evidence obtained as a result of the FBI's search of his work computer to be introduced at trial.

On the Fourth Amendment claims, judges found Cox didn't have a good enough reason for him failing to file a motion to suppress before the trial. Instead, Cox tried to suppress the work computer evidence as it was being presented during trial.

Cox had filed multiple other motions to suppress before the trial, and so, the 7th Circuit judges state, Cox should have known that if he wanted to file one for the work computer evidence, before, not during the trial, would have been the appropriate time.

"As such, Cox has not presented good cause for failing to comply with the Rule 12(b)(3)(C) deadline," the judges wrote.

Cox also alleged that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated when he wasn't read his Miranda Rights at either of his two interviews with investigators. In addition, he alleged his Sixth Amendment rights were violated because the Indiana Northern District Court judge denied Cox to call to the witness stand three people he argues would have helped his defense because it could show someone else could have been operating the Facebook account.

The 7th Circuit rejected Cox's Fifth Amendment claims, concluding that Cox was not in custody during the first interview with investigators held outside Cox's home and that Cox waived his ability to contest the second interview at his workplace because he failed to object when in front of the Indiana Northern District Court.

In response to Cox's allegation of Sixth Amendment violations, the 7th Circuit concluded that Cox could still make his defense arguments without witness testimony and that one of his motions to compel witness testimony from someone who may also have had access to the Facebook accounts was "untimely" because it was made three days into the trial.

"Cox's motion in the midst of trial was untimely, and he does not offer a good reason for not bringing it earlier," the judges write.

Lastly, Cox argues that the government's case against him lacked sufficient evidence.

In his appeal he argues investigators had "very little independent sources of information" and that much of the case against Cox used information gathered from interviews between Cox and investigators. He also argues he presented "compelling evidence" at trial that others had access to the accounts where photos and videos were stored.

The 7th Circuit rejects Cox's assertions, writing that while there was some evidence presented at trial that suggests other people had access to Facebook and file sharing accounts and that Cox was just one part of possibly a larger sextortion scheme, the evidence implicating Cox as part of the criminal scheme was "plentiful" and "substantial."

Evidence implicating Cox included that the phone number used to commit the offenses was registered through Cox's work internet connection; that the activity for this phone number aligned with Cox's home, commute and work habits; and that Cox confessed to the FBI multiple times.

"Given all the evidence listed above, indications that other people may have committed similar crimes and theoretically could be to blame for the at issue offenses do not render the jury's decision irrational," the 7th Circuit writes.

Tyler Juranovich can be reached at 765-454-8577, by email at tyler.juranovich@kokomotribune.com or on Twitter at @tylerjuranovich.