You are viewing this article in the archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see
Posted on Sun, Jan 22, 2012 : 5:57 a.m.

Man accused of having child pornography on work computer to return to court

By Kyle Feldscher

The man accused of using his work computer to access pornography and “boy lover” websites will return to court in March for a preliminary examination.

Frank Bertram, who was a Boy Scout leader and a chemist who worked for the Environmental Protection Agency when he was charged in U.S. District Court, faces four counts of possessing child pornography, according to court records. His next court date is scheduled for March 20.

Bertram was charged in June by federal authorities for using his work computer to access pornographic websites and “boy lover” websites, according to an affidavit filed in U.S. District Court. The same affidavit reported a search of Bertram’s home also found pornography.

If found guilty, each charge of possessing child pornography carries a maximum sentence of four years and a fine of $10,000.

Kyle Feldscher covers cops and courts for He can be reached at or you can follow him on Twitter.



Sun, Jan 22, 2012 : 9:37 p.m.

Don't people by now know that companys have access to the computers they use in the work place? Work computers are for work only!! Maxium prison time only 4 years? Fine only $10,000? Personally I don't get it, but glad he was caught.


Sun, Jan 22, 2012 : 2:42 p.m.

Frank Bertram: Ann Arbor resident Worked at an EPA lab on Plymouth Road Assistant Scout Master with Boy Scouts - Great Sauk Trail Council I wish they could throw away the key when he is sent to prison! &quot;One of (the) posts indicated that Bertram volunteered at boy's camps and was excited by the prospect of being able to 'spend time with about 25 or 30 boys tonight!'&quot; FBI Special Agent David Martin wrote in the complaint.&quot; Source: <a href="" rel='nofollow'></a>


Sun, Jan 22, 2012 : 1:56 p.m.

What is happening to our justice system. This man was charged in March and is scheduled to have his preliminary hearing NINE months later? Once again, swift justice goes by the wayside.


Sun, Jan 22, 2012 : 11:31 p.m.

hatfight, I think the defendant has to waive their right to a &quot;speedy&quot; trial for such a delay to take place. Otherwise the trial would be forced to proceed in far less time.


Sun, Jan 22, 2012 : 7:38 p.m.

The schedule of any criminal trial balances speed with due process. The prosecutor and court do not want to rush through a trial, with the result that the defendant wins a subsequent appeal because of mistakes. If it takes nine months to properly process the evidence (search computers, identify and age the subjects of the photographs) and give the defense time to prepare, the delay is appropriate. Only if a lack of judges or other officials cause delay should we be concerned.


Sun, Jan 22, 2012 : 1:56 p.m.

Excuse me, should have read &quot;charged in June&quot; not March.