the crimes charged. These instructions . made clear' the jury could convict Meisel only if it found Meisel “knowingly” (i.e., “realized what he was doing and was aware of the nature of his conduct and did not act through ignorance, mistake, or accident") possessed and distributed child pornography. Instruction Sixteen, the instruction dealing with distribution emphasized Meisel could only be guilty of the distribution count if the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Meisel “knowingly makes images availabl on. IV. CONCLUSION For those reasons set out above, the judgment of conviction entered by the United States District Court for the District of Kansas is hereby AFFIRMED. 1 . See Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319, 321, 330-31, 126 S.Ct. 1727, 164 L,Ed.2d 503 (2006) (<HOLDING>). 2 . "Consistent with other file-sharing
holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence based upon the defendants noncompliance with the deadlines in rule 412c holding that in light of strong evidence of guilt tainted evidence was harmless under brecht holding unconstitutional a state evidentiary rule automatically excluding alternative perpetrator evidence when the prosecution case was strong holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding hearsay evidence and evidence that violated the best evidence rule in deciding a summary judgment motion holding that malicious prosecution claim accrues when underlying prosecution is terminated