Bond increased for man accused of possessing child porn
By Debbie Lowe

After hearing testimony to support a motion filed by Carroll County Prosecutor Trisha Thompson to increase the bond for Leon Sprinkle,

Sprinkle Carroll Circuit Judge Donald Currie decided to reinstate Sprinkle's original bond amount of $45,000. Currie reduced Sprinkle's bond amount to $10,000 on Sept. 11, 2006, in a previous hearing.

Sprinkle was charged in June 2006 with five counts of possession of child pornography and one count of attempted child exploitation.

Defense attorney Patrick Manahan, who was appointed to represent Sprinkle after his June 24, 2006, arrest, argued that nothing had changed for Sprinkle since the bond was reduced and therefore there was no reason to increase the amount. He said although bond was currently arranged, Sprinkle had no place to reside and was still incarcerated in the Carroll County Jail.

He maintained Sprinkle was not a flight risk because he did not flee when another person in the same house, Keith Munson, was arrested on similar charges. However, Thompson and lead investigator in the case, sheriff's detective Steve Mullin, disagreed with Manahan.

Mullin testified Sprinkle was an over-the-road truck driver prior to his arrest. He said Sprinkle told him during the criminal investigation that he was looking for another job.

Mullin said Sprinkle pawned a drill, video cameras and other items for cash at EZ Pawn in Logansport immediately prior to his arrest.

He said when Sprinkle's car was searched at his residence located at 3270E. CR900N., maps, food in plastic storage containers and personal belongings such as razors, toiletries and clothing were found. Mullin said others in the home informed the police that Sprinkle said he was going to leave.

Additionally, Mullin testified Sprinkle posed a threat to the community because images of local children, considered victims in the case, were found in his bedroom. Mullin said Sprinkle provided the address of one victim to police, demonstrating that he was aware of the location of that child.

Thompson argued Sprinkle was a flight risk because he no longer had a place to live locally and because of his work history, has contacts in other states. She maintained he is a greater risk to leave the area because of the potential interest in the case by the United States Secret Service.

After reinstating the original bond amount, Currie stated Sprinkle was to have no contact with any minor child as a condition of bond.

March 19 at 9 a.m. is the date and time set for his trial to begin.