ShareThis Page

Plum man sentenced on porn charges

| Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2007

A Plum man pleaded guilty to charges that he took explicit photos of his former adopted daughter in a Walt Disney World hotel.

Matthew Mancuso, 49, entered his plea Monday in Orlando. He was sentenced to 14 years in prison on two counts of attempted sexual battery on a child under 12.

Mancuso already was sentenced to 35 years in prison for the same case in Pennsylvania, and 15 years on federal charges.

Florida prosecutors said they pursued charges there because the Pennsylvania case is on appeal and the other sentences might not stick.

The photographs surfaced in 2005 when Canadian police asked the public for tips on the identity of a girl appearing in hundreds of explicit photos. Investigators erased her image but posted the backgrounds -- including views of a fountain, elevator and hot tub. They received tips that some were taken at a Disney World hotel room.

"I would like to make a public apology to everything that's happened up to this point," Mancuso said at Monday's hearing.

Mancuso adopted the girl from a Russian orphanage in 1998, allegedly abusing her until authorities took her away in 2003.

The girl, now 15, attended the hearing. Her mother lamented a lost childhood, but she called herself a survivor.

"I have God," the girl said. "I am me, not because of what people did to me, but because of what I did."

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me