Although the full extent and nature of the sexual exploitation of children is only beginning to be recognised, it is a problem of global significance that requires strong and effective responses. The extent to which the viewing of child exploitation material CEM) is linked to involvement in producing such material, sharing it and using it to groom and then assault children is a key concern. Most such material is held online, and it is important to understand how offenders use the internet to access CEM and to groom children for sexual exploitation. This exploratory study examines data relating to a sample of offenders convicted of online child sexual exploitation offences under Australian Commonwealth law, to determine how online forms of child sexual exploitation and offline child sexual exploitation, or contact offending, are related. The majority of offenders in this study appeared to commit only online offences, although in a minority of cases there was a connection between exploitative material, grooming and contact offending. This study is an important early step in improving our understanding of offenders and points to the need for further assessment of the nature of online child sexual exploitation and its relationship to other forms of sexual and violent offences.
References
All URLs correct at September 2024
Australian Bureau of Statistics 2014. Internet activity Australia. ABS cat. no. 8153.0. Canberra: ABS. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/industry/technology-and-innovation/internet-activity-australia
Australian Bureau of Statistics 2005. Personal safety, Australia. ABS cat. no. 4906.0. Canberra: ABS. https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4906.0Main+Features12005%20(Reissue)?OpenDocument=
Australian Law Reform Commission 2010. Family violence: A national legal response. Canberra: ALRC. https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/family-violence-a-national-legal-response-alrc-report-114/
Beech AR & Elliot IA 2012. Understanding the emergence of the internet sex offender, in Quayle, Ethel (ed.), Understanding and preventing online sexual exploitation of children. Oxford: Routledge: 44–59
Bibas S 2003. Feeney amendment and the continuing rise of prosecutorial power to plea bargain. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 94: 295–308
Bourke ML & Hernandez AE 2009. The ‘Butner study’ redux: A report of the incidence of hands-on child victimization by child pornography offenders. Journal of Family Violence 24(3): 183–191
Clough J 2012. Lawful acts, unlawful images: The problematic definition of ‘child’ pornography. Monash University Law Review 38(3): 213–245
Copsey CM 2013. How many is any: Interpreting Sec. 2252A’s unit of prosecution for child pornography possession. American University Law Review 62(6): 1,675–1,735
Eke AW, Seto MC & Williams J 2011. Examining the criminal history and future offending of child pornography offenders: an extended prospective follow-up study. Law and human behavior 35(6): 466–478
Gelb K 2007. Recidivism of sex offenders: Research paper. Melbourne: Sentencing Advisory Council. https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/publications/recidivism-sex-offenders-research-paper
Henshaw M, Ogloff JR & Clough JA 2015. Looking beyond the screen: a critical review of the literature on the online child pornography offender. Sexual abuse: a journal of research and treatment 1–30
Hua J & Fitzgerald J 2006. Matching court records to measure reoffending Crime and justice bulletin 95. https://bocsar.nsw.gov.au/research-evaluations/2006/cjb95-matching-court-records-to-measure-reoffending.html
Krone T 2009. Does thinking make it so? Defining online child pornography possession offences Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 299. https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi299
Long ML, Laurence A & McManus M 2013. Child pornography and likelihood of contact abuse: A comparison between contact child sexual offenders and noncontact offenders. Sexual abuse: A journal of research and treatment 25 (4): 370-395
Luna E 2012. Prosecutorial decriminalization. Journal of criminal law and criminology 102(3): 785–819
McCarthy JA 2010. Internet sexual activity: A comparison between contact and non-contact child pornography offenders. Journal of sexual aggression 16(2): 181–195
McGuire M & Dowling S 2013. Cyber crime: A review of the evidence, chapter 3: Cyber-enabled crimes: Sexual offending against children. London Home Office Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cyber-crime-a-review-of-the-evidence
National Crime Agency (NCA) 2014. UK-wide operation snares 660 suspected paedophiles.
Office of the Children’s eSafety Commissioner 2015. eSafety hotline 2014–15 (online resource) Canberra: OCeC. https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20160304064637/https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-the-office/research-library/esafety-hotline-outcomes-infographic
Prichard J & Spiranovic C 2014. Child exploitation material in the context of institutional child sexual abuse: Report for the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20160615070220/http://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/getattachment/4539848e-dd4d-46f7-ae2f-2c670385ce8f/Child-Exploitation-Material-in-the-Context-of-Inst
Rettinger LJ 2000. The relationship between child pornography and the commission of sexual offences against children: A review of the literature. Ottawa: Department of Justice, Canada
Seto MC & Eke AW 2015. Predicting recidivism among adult male child pornography offenders: Development of the child pornography offender risk tool (CPORT). Law and human behavior 39(4): 416–429
Seto MC, Hanson RK & Babchishin KM 2011. Contact sexual offending by men with online sexual offenses. Sexual abuse: A journal of research and treatment 23(1): 124–145
Seto MC, Reeves L & Jung S 2010. Explanations given by child pornography offenders for their crimes. Journal of sexual aggression 16(2): 169–180
Sheldon K 2011. What we know about men who download child abuse images. British journal of forensic practice 13(4): 221–234
Wolak J Finkelhor D & Mitchell KJ 2005. Child-pornography possessors arrested in internet-related crimes: Findings from the national juvenile online victimization study. Washington: National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. https://www.unh.edu/ccrc/resource/child-pornography-possessors-arrested-internet-related-crimes-findings-national-juvenile-online