"Tell us what sort of child pornography has been introduced in a successful felony prosecution in your home town, city or county."
The media, which is often the only source of information in individual cases, does not produce objective reports on child pornography cases. It reports that pictures showed children "as young as [the youngest age]" and that a person possessed "pictures showing [the most offensive type of image which he possesses]".
Some of your questions are extreme to the point of irrelevancy. There is no evidence of children ever being killed in order to produce pornography.
I cannot "provide a link to a local registry of sex offenders", as I am not American.
If you wish to research the nature of child pornography, try analysing academic journals rather than the mainstream/local media. The majority of academic research suggests that violence is rarely a feature of child pornography.
"How many of those convicted for possession or distribution of child pornography also show convictions for sexual assaults and misdemeanors? Other violent crimes?"
The only study which found a significant correlation between the use of child pornography and the commission of contact offences was withdrawn from publication or peer review, due to concerns over its applicability to the general population of child pornography offenders.
In short, claims that child pornography is mostly abusive and dangerous are not supported by the majority of academic sources investigating the nature of the material. The media's claims are motivated by potential newspaper sales (or adverts, in the case of broadcast media), the NCMEC and other organisations are motivated by a desire for repeat funding, while governments know that they can restrict the freedoms of the population (especially on the internet) by playing the child porn card.
I encourage you to read the list of quotes which I posted above, as they answer many of your questions.