Cyber-Offenses

[kensinger]

We had David Delmonico and Elizabeth Griffin do a full-day presentation on cyber-offenses. They are likely THE experts, along with Michael Seto in this area.

In talking with them during the breaks, it seemed to me that alot of cyberoffenders don't need the regular regimen of years of treatment that may be standard stuff for the RP or Good Lives approaches.

About 10 yrs ago, we began separating out the statutory rape offenders who did not need years of treatment and began periodic stat groups/classes which could provide what was needed in 16 weeks rather than years. That freed up space for more serious offenders and got these guys treatment that was more appropriate.

In talking to David and Elizabeth, the idea of weeding out the "discovery" type offender who collects or downloads child pornography or engages in other cyber offenses that don't result in hands on behaviors, might be appropriate for a new type of group to provide the necessary treatment without tying them up in regular hands-on treatment for years.

I thought this site might be a good place to begin a dialog to look at the research that's out there and consider typologies, assessment and treatment components for this rapidly growing population.

Would you all be interested in setting up a thread here to begin discussing this population and ways to separate the wolves from the sheep?

[docjan]

I am always interested in hearing and discussing issues. I must say that I do not have a lot of experience in this area, but I am always wanting to learn more. I do see that this issue is a growing problem. Thanks, Janice

[PMH]

The big question it seems, is how to weed out those cyber-offenders who really have no "hands-on" offenses from those who claim they do not, but really have offended, or have attempted "hands-on" offenses.

My most recent workshop on cyber offending came from the law-enforcement perspective. Robert Farley presented in Austin last month, and one of the things that struck me was the intentionality of the offenders.

The child porn does not just accidently end up on the computer, most of these guys really have to work at obtaining, trading, and hiding their stash.

I worry that we may tend to under-estimate the degree of deviance when we try to down-play cyber crimes just because they are not "hands-on."

-PMH

[kensinger]

Good points, Paul.

I brought this up because it is (to my knowledge) not very well understood. The technology changes are so rapid and the means of hiding things are increasing faster than the average clinician (or law enforcement person) can imagine.

A few years back, we had a supervisor of the FBI's missing and exploited children's unit give a presentation. He talked about the lack of resources to track more than the most egregious trafficers in child pornography and spoke of encryption programs that set up almost alternate universe situations for the Feds to monitor.

I think this is an area that is really exploding and I would love to see some researchers develop a means of teasing out the hands-on offenders and more diabolical participants so we can concentrate on them and not waste time on people who, more than likely, will stay law-abiding with the experience of getting caught and are not likely to do it again.

Is there anything out there besides "clinical judgment" to figure out what we're dealing with?

Should we have some kind of tech related forum here to archive the news and info about cyber crimes and develop typologies of serious from non serious offenders?

Just putting this out there for discussion.....
Ken

[PMH]

That's a good idea.

I think your right, there is so little that we know. And what we see as clinicians is different from what law enforcement sees.

I wish I could have been present to see Delmonico and Griffen's workshop.

I'll start a sub-board, and move this thread into it.

-PMH

[docjan]

If anyone hears of any training materials or workshops on this in the near future, please share. I agree that there is a lot of confusion about these topics and of the importance of learning everything we can to prevent allowing ourselves to be groomed into thinking someone is rather harmless who may be preying upon vulnerable individuals.

[PMH]

How about this one?

Here is the link to the Crimes Against Children Conference in Dallas this August

www.cacconference.org/dcac/default.aspx

I understand it is really huge, with a focus mostly on Law Enforcement. But I think we need all the educating we can get.

-PMH

[stevethomas1]

Hello All:

I've just joined this thread and list serve, but I do use the post conviction sexul history polygraph to distinguish between those who have hands on or other paraphilias from those who don;t. I haven't read of others using polygraphy.

Unusual is a recent 80 + year old man who was referred for evaluation and he reprots no sexal contact with adult males or females bye who has possessed a huge amount of child porn. I am intreested in what the polygraphe examianton will uncover.

Steve Thomas

[igravers]

I am finding that some of the child porn offenders have hands on victims and others who view child porngraphy because of a sexual attraction towards kids but do not have hands on victims. I know how to treat the hands on offender. The concern I have is the pedophilic individual with no hands on offenses. Is he planning on it in the future? Did he get caught early enough, or was he never planning to have a hands on offense? Does he need more intensive treatment because of the underlying sexual deviance? Or is he lower risk? I have such a man in my group right now and am concerned about the pedophilia aspect, but his sexual hx poly shows no hands on vics. Thoughts?

[jlooman]

Because of the population I deal with I don't encounter child porn offenders who haven't also had convictions for hand-on offences. However, if I was to have a client who had a signficant amount of porn on his computer and admitted to a sexual attraction to children I would probably treat him the same as I would a contact offence pedophile. I think that many of the issues, in terms of cogntive distortions and rationalizations for the behaviour, would be the same. You could explore intimacy/relationship issues (which I'm sure would be there). Other than the actual physical contact with children I really can't think of any treatment targets for a hands-on offender that wouldn't be present for a cyber-offender. Issues related to minimization/denial might be more present ("I didn't hurt anyone because I didn't actually touch a kid").

Jan

[billy]

Cyber offfense accounts for 4 of my last six offenders. I'm wondering if there are testing in-
struments out there to help assess this population of noncontact sex offenders

[docb]

Glad to see us having this discussion. I do have allot of experience with this type of offense. I am being asked to do evaluations allot that do not come by the usual referral sources. This problem shows up in family court when the wife is seeking a divorce and one of precipitating events is that child porn has been found on the computer. These cases can be very difficult and the court wants answers and the wife wants to know if their children are safe. I have done extensive literature reviews and there are different opinions about how this is linked to hands on offenses or whether or not this is just an escalation of an addiction or a true pedophilic interest. I think we have to use whatever instruments are available right now to help us and clinical judgment does enter into this. Allot of the articles I have been reading emphasize that in these cases we have to look at other variable such as Psychopathic tendencies, power and control issues, anger issues etc. Most of the current typologies are from resources that looked at convicted sex offenders and those typologies do not include those who have not been through the criminal justice system. I have an evaluation now where there was no download of any images and the only source of pornography he was using was erotic stories on father-daughter incest. He has a 9 year old adopted daughter now. He has been reading these stories since 1999 about a year before adopting the daughter. I have not been able to find any literature that talks about the use of erotic stories in sex offending. If anyone knows of any resources please let me know.

[dgenco]

I was glad to see a discussion where the polygraph was mentioned and we didn't get sent into a tailspin on the "accuracy" or "admissability" of the polygraph. Having said that, I will say right away I am in total support of the use of polygraph for post conviction assessment and treatment.

With regard to "cyber-offenders" as you are calling them here, I have treated many of these over my career (almost 20 years now). What I have found is that the MAJORITY of child pornography offenders have had hands on offenses. Most of those had their hands on offense PRIOR to their child porn experiences on the net. I know this is not consistent with the research but I know what I'm seeing in my clinic. My clients have been, over the years, made up of County Probationers, State Parolees, Federal Probation and some voluntary. Typically, we don't find out about the hands on offenses until after we do the sex history polygraph. Sometimes it takes 2 or 3 times before they have disclosed all their hands on victims.

Dr. Steven Gray did a study a few years back that supported what I am seeing about the child porn offenders. I think there have been other studies that have confirmed this as well.

Again, not all cyber offenders have hands on victims. However, without some good objective measures to help assess this, like the polygraph, we're sort of just throwing a dart blindfolded. I'm sure the antipolygraph folks will disagree about this, but hopefully this list is more open to oposing views than "other lists."

[kensinger]

I'm not a heavy consumer of research (or pornography) but I'm interested in the research that has been done in this area. Anecdotal impressions are what I'm more familiar with but I know that I can't rely on clinical impressions to make a point.

I'd like to encourage clinicians and researchers to give us some direction here in that there is an alarming increase in these kinds of cases (and I'm lumping in a lot of different offenses, from csai (child sexual abuse images) to internet sexchat with underage people, to some of the other kinds of internet related offenses.)

So, if we can begin to sort out who is or might be dangerous from those who are likely not, we can use our limited resources better.

[kensinger]

Because of the rapid expansion of new technology, I think studies more than a couple of years old are going to be out of date even before publication. By the time the data is collected, evaluated and not to mention the delay between submission and publication, years have gone by.

I am hoping we can better understand this population(s). But where to start?

Not a researcher, I don't even know where to begin. If we look at the index offense, can we distinguish by categories (i.e., possession of child sexual abuse images, cyber chat with under age- no attempt to meet up, attempted meetings with underage partners, videocam exhibitionism in adult rooms that somehow included minors, etc.)

I'm also curious about the effects on the brain from these kinds of behaviors. Do they all light up similiar areas such as we see with certain drugs and other stimuli?

Is there some kind of rapid change in the structure that is caused by the brain chemistry when stimulated by these kinds of instant gratification behaviors?

I am concerned about the possibility of unknown hands on offenses and maybe the only way we can have some assurance about what we are dealing with is to use post-conviction polygraphs to get more accurate sexual history on these individuals.