Todd Roatsey Sentencing Memorandum For The United States

Case 2:21-cr-00235 Document 80 Filed 11/10/22 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 343
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v. CRIMINAL NO. 2:21-00235
TODD CHRISTOPHER ROATSEY
SENTENCING MEMORANDUM OF THE UNITED STATES
Comes now the United States of America by Assistant United
States Attorney Jennifer Rada Herrald and files this Sentencing
Memorandum. Based on the facts set forth in the Presentence
Investigation Report (“PSR”) and as more fully discussed below,
defendant's conduct warrants a sentence of 35 years in prison,
which is the top end of the sentencing range agreed to by the
parties in the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement and already a
substantial downward variance from the advisory guideline range of
life in prison.
A. Background
Defendant has spent his entire adult life engaged in the
sexual abuse and exploitation of children. Starting in his early
twenties and continuing through his arrest in this case two decades
later, defendant has engaged in nearly every type of sexual abuse
that exists. During that time, he has:
• Sexually abused at least two children between the ages of

11 and 13 in the early 2000s by repeatedly having sexual
intercourse with them while he was an adult;
• Pretended to be a teenage boy on Snapchat in order to

produce child pornography of at least two minors;
• Pretended to be a teenage boy on Snapchat in order to

engage in sexually inappropriate conversations with
elementary school students he knew through his employment
at Pinch Elementary;
• Communicated with other pedophiles online to exchange

images and videos of the sexual abuse of children as young
as infants and toddlers;
• Collected child sexual abuse materials depicting the sexual

abuse of children, including infants and toddlers, both on
his own computer equipment and on secure online file
storage platforms;
• Participated in online teen dating groups while pretending

to be a teenager in order to communicate with underage
girls and direct them to his Snapchat account;
• Participated in online chat groups dedicated to encouraging

incest;
• Commented on posts on online chat forums to encourage

sexual activity between adults and minors;
• Encouraged minors online to send him images of their

breasts;
• Recorded inappropriate videos of students at his school;

and
• Masturbated to images of students from his school.
This is only the conduct that has been disclosed to law enforcement
by victims or located on defendant’s computer equipment and online
media accounts. Given the low rates at which victims of sexual
abuse report their victimization and defendant’s use of encrypted
online programs, VPNs (to hide his IP address and other online
2
identifiers), and extremely thorough anti-forensic software, this
is likely an incomplete picture of the totality of defendant’s
exploitation of children over the last twenty years.
Defendant’s earliest known sexual abuse of children dates to
when he was in his early twenties. During that time, defendant
befriended two girls at the pool where he worked as a lifeguard
and persuaded them to engage in sexual intercourse with him. One
of his victims was 13 at the time, and the other was only 11 years
old when he began his approximately two-year period of sexual
abuse. The long-term impact on both victims was profound, as
further detailed in the PSR.
At approximately the same time frame that he was abusing these
two young girls, defendant began working as a substitute teacher
in Kanawha County Schools. He eventually became a full-time
elementary school counselor, first at Harts Primary School in
Lincoln County beginning in 2008 and then at Pinch Elementary in
Kanawha County since 2012. Defendant’s chosen career path — a
counselor for elementary school children — placed him in a position
of trust over children of the age to which he was sexually
attracted. His particular role as counselor also gave him the
direct ability to identify vulnerable children based upon his
knowledge of their home situations and mental health. This decision
to gain access to children through his work illustrates the deeply
3
concerning and predatory behavior demonstrated by defendant for so
many years.
In a particularly disturbing abuse of his position at Pinch
Elementary, in 2018 defendant made a video recording of an
approximately 4th or 5th grade student on the playground during
the school day. This video (filed separately under seal as Exhibit
1) depicts the young girl on a swing while wearing a dress with
coordinating shorts underneath. She is standing on the swing with
one leg while swinging the other leg for momentum. During the
approximately one-minute video, defendant repeatedly switches the
video to slow motion during moments when the camera is recording
up the girl’s dress and shorts. Given defendant’s obvious sexual
interest in children, there is little doubt as to his reasons for
creating such a troubling video.
But if any doubt did exist as to his intentions regarding
images and videos of his students, another video located on
defendant’s cell phone unquestionably removes it. In a screen
recording saved by defendant, he is depicted masturbating while
directing the victim of the offenses of conviction (Minor Female
1) to send him sexually explicit videos over Snapchat. Apparently
not quite satisfied with the live-streaming child pornography from
that girl, defendant scrolls through the photos on his phone until
he finds a picture of a Pinch Elementary School student. He then
zooms in on the face of one of the two young girls. This video
4
confirms that defendant was a predator who took advantage of his
position as a school counselor to identify local children to
exploit for his own sexual gratification.
Defendant also turned to the internet to further his sexual
interest in children. Having reached an age where young girls would
likely have no interest in him, he created a Snapchat account and
pretended to be an 18-year-old boy. From this account, defendant
reached out to multiple children he knew through Pinch Elementary,
tricking them into believing they were talking to an attractive
teen rather than their middle-aged school counselor. 1 An example
of the types of videos defendant secretly recorded from these
Snapchat conversations is attached as Exhibit 2 (filed separately
under seal). In the video, defendant encourages two girls (one of
whom had just completed 4th grade at Pinch Elementary) to send him
sexy videos of themselves dancing. The video also includes a
picture he sent the two girls, purportedly of himself. A screenshot
depicting this photograph and some of defendant’s comments to the
girls is attached hereto as Exhibit 3. This video is one of over
a hundred similar videos recorded by defendant. These videos are
yet another example of defendant’s exploitation of local girls who
1Defendant had also been warned by the school system to not contact
students via social media, so defendant used his fictitious persona
to get around this prohibition.
5
were supposed to be able to place their trust in their school
counselor.
Defendant also utilized his deceptive Snapchat account to
actually produce child pornography of at least two victims who
lived outside the area. These unidentified minors, believing
defendant was the attractive teen depicted in Exhibit 3, sent him
dozens of graphic videos of themselves masturbating. Defendant
explicitly and in very vulgar terms told them what he wanted them
to do. He also sent the girls videos of himself masturbating.
Defendant has pled guilty to charges related to this conduct as to
one of the victims, who he believed to be 16 years old.
If his hands-on abuse of children, exploitation of his
position as an elementary school counselor for his own sexual
gratification, and use of deception to entice minors to produce
sexually explicit videos was not enough to demonstrate his
egregious predatory behavior, defendant also was extensively
involved in the exchange of child pornography with other men intent
on abusing children. Defendant maintained extensive online
collections of child pornography, including videos graphically
depicting the sexual abuse of extremely young children. In order
to leave no doubt as to their content, these files were stored in
folders with names such as “CP” and “Rape.” Defendant had two
different accounts on the file storage and exchange platform Mega,
a platform popular with pedophiles due to the sophisticated
6
encryption utilized. In once account, law enforcement located 36
GB of child pornography, and in the other account there was a saved
conversation wherein defendant transferred videos of prepubescent
child pornography to another person.
Defendant also used the messaging application Kik to exchange
child pornography. In the above-mentioned Mega conversation, he
and the other user expressed their concerns about Kik being shut
down and cutting off their pipeline for new child sexual abuse
materials. Defendant’s use of Kik to distribute child pornography
is what initially tipped law enforcement off to his crimes; when
defendant failed to sign in through a VPN to mask his identity
when he transferred child pornography to numerous other
individuals on Kik, the service was able to flag his account and
identify him for law enforcement to investigate. Had defendant not
slipped up and failed to mask his IP address, it is likely he would
still be actively exploiting minors.
Defendant was also a frequent user of a website known as
Quora, which consists of user-created groups where people with
common interests can communicate. Defendant again posed as a
teenager and followed several teen-only dating pages, presumably
to meet underage girls and do research on communication between
teenagers to refine his skills for deceiving teens online. He
messaged with several underage users, at least one who was only
13, and attempted to get them to talk to him on his Snapchat
7
account. On Quora he also participated in incest groups such as
“Club Incest” and made numerous posts encouraging minors to
continue to allow family members to abuse them because it would
make them “very good in bed” and better able to satisfy their
future husbands so that their spouses would not cheat.
Defendant’s conduct involved nearly every way a person can
exploit children and has occurred over a two-decade time period.
Defendant intentionally placed himself in a position of trust at
an elementary school in order to surround himself by the kinds of
children to whom he was sexually attracted. Defendant is a sexual
predator of the most egregious variety, and his sentence must
reflect the substantial harm that he has done to so many children
in such a wide variety of ways over such a long period of time.
B. Sentencing Factors
In considering the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors,
the United States asks that the Court consider the following:
(1) The nature and circumstances of the offense.
The offenses of conviction involve defendant lying about his
identity to convince a 16-year-old girl (Minor Female 1) to produce
dozens of videos of herself masturbating for his own personal
enjoyment. Defendant had to gradually persuade her to become more
and more explicit in these videos. And defendant surreptitiously
recorded and preserved what the minor believed would be
automatically deleted by Snapchat without being saved anywhere.
8
Defendant’s deceptive and predatory conduct in committing the most
egregious of the federal child pornography offenses — production
— warrants a sentence of 35 years.
(2) The history and characteristics of the defendant.
It is defendant’s history and characteristics that make a
sentence below 35 years unreasonable under § 3553(a). As detailed
above, defendant has engaged in a long-term campaign of abusing
and exploiting children, both in person and online. He has used
deceptive means to trick both unknown minors into sending him
sexually explicit videos and local children from his own school
into engaging in abhorrent, sexually suggestive conversations with
him. He used his position as a lifeguard to convince two young
girls to have sex with him. He has placed himself in a position of
trust at an elementary school to have a hunting ground for
vulnerable girls in his community. He has collected and exchanged
images and videos of the horrendous sexual abuse of extremely young
children with other predators from around the world. He has taken
numerous measures to attempt to avoid detection, including using
VPNs and extremely effective anti-forensic software on his
computers. Simply put, he is among the worst offenders the
undersigned counsel has seen in her decade of prosecuting child
sex offenses in this district.
Reasons that have been used to justify downward variances in
other cases simply do not apply to defendant. Unlike many child
9
pornography offenders, defendant has had hands-on victims. Unlike
some sex offenders in this district who have engaged in their
criminal activity over only a short period of time, defendant’s
predatory behavior spans twenty years. Unlike most other sex
offenders, defendant placed himself in a position of trust within
an elementary school and abused that position to identify and
target students within the school for his own sexual gratification.
Unlike most offenders, who engage in only one type of sexual abuse,
defendant has exploited children in nearly every way possible. And
unlike some other offenders, there is no reason to believe that
such a prolific and long-term abuser of children through such a
wide variety of methods will be able to curb his lifelong sexual
interest in children.
It is true that defendant has been gainfully employed and, by
external appearances, has been a productive member of society
engaged in a noble profession of public service in the school
system. But defendant has been a wolf in sheep’s clothing. His
outward appearance of respectability cloaked the predator beneath,
who used this gainful employment to have access to children.
Predators like defendant, who so egregiously abuse the trust that
parents and the community place in them, tarnish the reputations
of the hardworking and dedicated teachers in our community and
erode the safe environment that a school should provide.
10
Defendant’s employment history is an aggravating, rather than
mitigating, factor for purposes of sentencing.
Defendant’s history and characteristics reveal a person who
has preyed on children his entire adult life and has used a wide
variety of means to achieve this purpose, including working at an
elementary school. There is no justification under this factor to
vary downward further than the already variant sentence of 35 years
in prison.
(3) Need for sentence imposed to reflect seriousness of the

offense, respect for the law, just punishment, adequate
deterrence, and to protect the public.
Defendant’s offense is unusually egregious, and his sentence
must reflect that fact. A sentence at the top end of the range
under the plea agreement reflects the seriousness of the offense
and satisfies the need for just punishment. It also is necessary
to promote respect for the law, particularly in light of
defendant’s attempt to obstruct justice by deleting his Snapchat
account immediately after federal agents executed a search warrant
at his house. A sentence of 35 year also sends a clear message to
other would-be offenders that our society does not tolerate this
type of exploitation of children. Finally, and most importantly,
the maximum sentence under the plea agreement ensures that the
community will be protected for as long as possible from a man who
has exploited children in so many different ways for such a long
period of time.
11
(4) Need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities among

similarly situated defendants.
Defendant’s offense level under the sentencing guidelines is
quite literally off the chart. And yet it also fails to fully
capture the extent of his conduct. Despite defendant’s role as a
figure of trust in an elementary school, this enhancement does not
apply because he was not in a position of trust over the victim of
the offense of conviction. His possession of images and videos
depicting horrific abuse of infants and toddlers is not captured
in his guideline calculation. His sexual abuse of two children
twenty years ago is not captured in his guidelines except by being
lumped in generally to the pattern of conduct enhancement under
USSG § 4B1.5. His extensive distribution of child pornography to
other pedophiles around the world is not included in his guideline
calculation. There is thus a strong argument that defendant’s
conduct is more egregious than other offenders with the same
guideline calculation.
However, there is obviously no higher for his guidelines to
go than an offense level of 43 with an advisory guideline of life
in prison. A 35-year sentence under the plea agreement is thus
already a downward variance from what would be the advisory
guideline range for defendants who had committed less serious and
extensive crimes. Accordingly, any further variance below 35 years
12
would create the kind of unwarranted sentencing disparities that
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) is designed to avoid.
C. Conclusion
The United States respectfully requests that the Court accept
the plea agreement and sentence defendant to 35 years in prison
followed by a lifetime term of supervised release.
Respectfully submitted,
WILLIAM S. THOMPSON
United States Attorney
/s/Jennifer Rada Herrald

JENNIFER RADA HERRALD
Assistant United States Attorney
WV Bar No. 12181
300 Virginia Street, East
Room 4000
Charleston, WV 25301
Telephone: 304-345-2200
Fax: 304-347-5104
Email: jennifer.herrald@usdoj.gov
13
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
It is hereby certified that the foregoing "SENTENCING
MEMORANDUM OF THE UNITED STATES" has been electronically filed and
service has been made on opposing counsel by virtue of such
electronic filing this 10th day of November, 2022 to:
John A. Carr, Esq.

John A. Carr Attorney at Law, PLLC
179 Summers Street, Ste 209
E-mail: jcarr@jcarrlaw.com
/s/Jennifer Rada Herrald

JENNIFER RADA HERRALD
Assistant United States Attorney
WV Bar No. 12181
300 Virginia Street, East
Room 4000
Telephone: 304-345-2200
Fax: 304-347-5104
Email: jennifer.herrald@usdoj.gov
14

Todd Roatsey Sentencing Memorandum For The United States

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Todd Roatsey Sentencing Memorandum For The United States

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 2:21-cr-00235 Document 80 Filed 11/10/22 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 343

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CRIMINAL NO. 2:21-00235

TODD CHRISTOPHER ROATSEY

SENTENCING MEMORANDUM OF THE UNITED STATES

Comes now the United States of America by Assistant United

States Attorney Jennifer Rada Herrald and files this Sentencing

Memorandum. Based on the facts set forth in the Presentence

Investigation Report (“PSR”) and as more fully discussed below,

defendant's conduct warrants a sentence of 35 years in prison,

which is the top end of the sentencing range agreed to by the

parties in the Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement and already a

substantial downward variance from the advisory guideline range of

Defendant has spent his entire adult life engaged in the

sexual abuse and exploitation of children. Starting in his early

later, defendant has engaged in nearly every type of sexual abuse

that exists. During that time, he has:

• Sexually abused at least two children between the ages of

• Pretended to be a teenage boy on Snapchat in order to

• Pretended to be a teenage boy on Snapchat in order to

• Communicated with other pedophiles online to exchange

• Collected child sexual abuse materials depicting the sexual

• Participated in online teen dating groups while pretending

• Participated in online chat groups dedicated to encouraging

• Commented on posts on online chat forums to encourage

• Encouraged minors online to send him images of their

• Recorded inappropriate videos of students at his school;

• Masturbated to images of students from his school.

by victims or located on defendant’s computer equipment and online

media accounts. Given the low rates at which victims of sexual

abuse report their victimization and defendant’s use of encrypted

identifiers), and extremely thorough anti-forensic software, this

is likely an incomplete picture of the totality of defendant’s

exploitation of children over the last twenty years.

Defendant’s earliest known sexual abuse of children dates to

when he was in his early twenties. During that time, defendant

befriended two girls at the pool where he worked as a lifeguard

and persuaded them to engage in sexual intercourse with him. One

old when he began his approximately two-year period of sexual

abuse. The long-term impact on both victims was profound, as

further detailed in the PSR.

At approximately the same time frame that he was abusing these

two young girls, defendant began working as a substitute teacher

in Kanawha County Schools. He eventually became a full-time

elementary school counselor, first at Harts Primary School in

Lincoln County beginning in 2008 and then at Pinch Elementary in

Kanawha County since 2012. Defendant’s chosen career path — a

counselor for elementary school children — placed him in a position

of trust over children of the age to which he was sexually

attracted. His particular role as counselor also gave him the

direct ability to identify vulnerable children based upon his

knowledge of their home situations and mental health. This decision

to gain access to children through his work illustrates the deeply

concerning and predatory behavior demonstrated by defendant for so

In a particularly disturbing abuse of his position at Pinch

Elementary, in 2018 defendant made a video recording of an

approximately 4th or 5th grade student on the playground during

1) depicts the young girl on a swing while wearing a dress with

coordinating shorts underneath. She is standing on the swing with

approximately one-minute video, defendant repeatedly switches the

video to slow motion during moments when the camera is recording

up the girl’s dress and shorts. Given defendant’s obvious sexual