CSAM & Predators - Unlawful Images and "Sexting"

Remarks of Dr. Frank Kardasz, November 12, 2009 

To the Arizona Family Council meeting - Phoenix

Thanks for inviting me to speak today about the threat of pornography to our children. I would like to first talk about a prominent Arizona case involving child pornography, then briefly about the sad phenomena of “sexting” and end with a couple safety tips and educational references.

CASE STUDY
In 2003, an Arizona man was convicted on 20 counts of possession of child pornography and sentenced to 200 years prison. He appealed the sentence and lost. In affirming the conviction the Arizona Court of Appeals said several important things about unlawful images depicting the sexual exploitation of minors:

• Child pornography is a form of child abuse. The materials produced are a permanent record of the children's participation and the harm to the child is exacerbated by their circulation.
• The state's interest in safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor is compelling.
  ...the victimization of a child continues when that act is memorialized in an image. The victimization does not end when the pornographer's camera is put away.
• The legislative judgment…is that the use of children as subjects of pornographic materials is harmful to the physiological, emotional, and mental health of the child.
• ...the possession of child pornography drives that industry and…the production of child pornography will decrease if those who possess the product are punished equally with those who produce it.
• ...the possession of child pornography inflames the desires of child molesters, pedophiles and child pornographers. The State has more than a passing interest in forestalling the damage caused by child pornography: preventing harm to children is one of its most important interests.
• Defendant downloaded images from the Internet, and every time he visited a website, he demonstrated to the producers and sellers of child pornography that there was a demand for their product. His demand served to drive the industry.
• Defendant maintains also that, because his possession of the pornographic images was passive and because he did not use threats or violence in the commission of his crimes, his sentence is grossly disproportionate. The court said that this logic is abstruse.

As a law enforcement officer I share the courts opinion about unlawful images depicting the sexual exploitation of minors and I am guided by the courts judgements. The aforementioned case occurred several years ago but everything the court said still applies to the adult offenders we see today. SEXTING Now – today - in 2009, we have a new unlawful images threat. That threat comes from something that has come to be known as sexting.

As you know, modern cell phones often come equipped with cameras that can be legitimately used to capture images. Young people use their cell phone cameras to snap pictures of friends, families and special occasions. Images taken with cell phone cameras can be shared between users who can quickly send images to wider groups of friends. There have even been cases of crimes being solved by images retrieved from cell phones. Unfortunately, cameras are also sometimes used to capture images of nudism or sexual exploitation. Often the images are part of the "sexting" process.

Sexting is the act of sending sexual text or sexual images from one electronic device to another, often for the purpose of grooming another person towards a sex act. Adult sexual predators often groom intended victims by sexting. Immature grade schoolers also trade images and those images are quickly traded to others in the child’s school causing humiliation and grief for all involved. Sometimes the images are felony pictures of child pornography.

An increasing number of complaints are being received by law enforcement involving illegal images trafficked via cell phone. It is unlikely that we will be locking up grade school kids for child pornography, however we are investigating many of the cases and submitting them to the county attorneys for their analysis towards prosecution. 

In the one case of sexting where we have received a response from the county attorneys office, the matter was deemed “de minimus” which means trivial and not worthy of judicial scrutiny. The case was seen to have no reasonable likelihood of conviction and the predicted cost of prosecution outweighed the benefit of prosecution to the victim and/or society. That response does not solve the problem for the sexting victim or family. 

The response tells you that the criminal justice system cannot solve the sexting problem either. I am hoping that someone can develop some kind of diversion program for young people who involve themselves with unlawful images while sexting. With the justice system waffling on sexting, it becomes incumbent upon parents to police the activities of their children.

ADVICE ABOUT “SEXTING” PREVENTION  
Here is my advice to parents: Parents, please monitor your child's use of a cell phone camera.

• Talk to your children about the problem and the long-term implications.
• Remember that once an image is released to others or into cyberspace, it is irretrievable.
• Pictures can be shared and duplicated across cyberspace and the images might not ever be erased.
• Consider purchasing cheaper “pay as you go” phones that are manufactured without cameras.
• -EDUCATION AND TRAINING  

Here are four helpful organizations for more educational information.

• Netsmartz - http://www.netsmartz.org/index.aspx
• ISafe - http://www.isafe.org/
• GetNetWise - http://www.getnetwise.org/
• Enough is Enough - http://www.enough.org/

TO REPORT INTERNET CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN

• Report Internet crimes against children to your local police or to the NCMEC Cybertipline at: https://www.missingkids.org/