Connecticut- When Stonington, Conn., resident and former Pfizer executive Alan J. Hesketh was convicted of distributing child pornography, the one punishment he probably didn’t expect was paying restitution.

But in a decision drawing national attention, U.S. District Court Judge Warren W. Eginton for the District of Connecticut has ordered Hesketh to pay $200,000 to one of the girls, now 19, whose images Hesketh downloaded and distributed.

Eginton’s ruling is the first to order restitution from someone who downloaded and distributed child pornography but did not actually take the photographs or partake in the abuse itself. “I was shocked. I was stunned,” said Hesketh’s attorney, Jonathan J. Einhorn. “There is no case law in the United States.”

In fact, according to Einhorn, previously in the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the only criminal restitution awarded in a child pornography case netted a victim just $17,000 from the man who actually took the photos. In the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, he said, a victim was awarded $57,000, again from the actual creator of the child pornography.

Eginton himself was fully aware of the precedent his decision, at least for the time being, has set. Einhorn plans to appeal. “We’re dealing with a frontier here,” said Eginton at the restitution hearing last week. “There is a feeling of revulsion with this type of conduct.”

Authorities said that from June 2006 to May 2007, Hesketh used the Internet to exchange hundreds of images of child pornography and to engage in online “chats” about the sexual molestation of children. Prosecutors said many of the images showed minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct with adults and with other minors.

Hesketh was arrested in March 2008, convicted in July and sentenced this past fall. He was fired from his job in New London, Conn., as a Pfizer vice president and global patent director.

The girl who Hesketh must pay the restitution to is one of 24 victims identified by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in the thousands of pictures confiscated from Hesketh’s hard drive. The U.S. Attorney’s Office notified the 24 victims. Only one victim came forward; she was 8 or 9 years old when a relative abused her.

The victim hired White Plains, N.Y., attorney James Marsh. He said there is no distinction between Hesketh and the people who actually produced the pornography.

“The victim is a victim of sexual exploitation caused by this defendant,” Marsh said. “This notion that somehow we can excuse the defendant because there is no sexual contact is an affront to the victim.”

Einhorn sees it differently. “How much harm do you do to a victim who doesn’t know her picture is being downloaded four times?”

But Ernie Allen, president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, said he hopes the ruling leads to more restitution orders and that they serve as deterrents to child pornography.

“We think this is a terrific precedent,” Allen said. “The photos stay out there forever. Every time they are downloaded, every time they are distributed, the victim in that image is re-victimized.”

Einhorn agrees with Allen in that he foresees more restitution claims like this moving forward. “I think claimants and their lawyers will see this could potentially be a lucrative area if a defendant has assets,” said Einhorn.

That was certainly the case here. Hesketh, a native of England who will be deported after finishing serving his six-and-a-half year prison sentence, owns homes in Stonington, New York, England and the Isle of Man. Before working at Pfizer, Hesketh, who also has a law degree, worked at Glaxo Wellcome pharmaceuticals in England, according to court documents.

In fact, it was a strategic move on the part of Marsh to seek restitution in the criminal action rather than in a separate civil proceeding. With restitution awarded as part of the criminal case, the U.S. Attorney’s Office collects the money so actually getting it becomes easier.

Still, Marsh is among those who does not think that Eginton’s decision will necessarily lead to an increase in victims seeking large restitution awards in these kinds of cases. He said victims of child pornography are typically reluctant to come forward or don’t have the means to pursue the cases.