ACDLA JOHN MATTHEW FABIAN, PSY.D., J.D., ABPP

ACDLA JOHN MATTHEW FABIAN, PSY.D., J.D., ABPP
HOW TO UTILIZE FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATIONS WITHIN INTERNET ONLINE SOLICITATION & PORNOGRAPHY SEX CASES JOHN MATTHEW FABIAN, PSY.D., J.D., ABPP BOARD CERTIFIED FORENSIC & CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST

TO CATCH A PREDATOR Recently there has been initiation of widespread sex offender legislation throughout the United States gearing towards harsher penalties, longer mandatory minimum sentences for sex crimes, lifetime supervision of sex offenders by global positioning satellite after they are released from prison, and indefinite civil commitment of these offenders after their prison term expires. Such laws include the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act[i] and the Jessica Lunsford Act.[ii] [i] 109 P.L. 248 (2006). [ii] 2006 Fl. ALS 25 (2006).

AGENDA Characteristics of online investigations and offenders
Characteristics of child pornography D’s Does child pornography use lead to hands-on sex offending? Forensic psychological evaluations and risk assessment in online solicitation and child pornography possession cases

TO CATCH A “PREDATOR” These laws have been the topic of a media frenzy urged by television shows such as Dateline’s “To Catch a Predator” and investigators Bill O’Reilly and Hannity and Combs.

To Catch a Predator While the statutes appear to aim towards protecting society from high risk sex offenders, the public is led to believe that all sex offenders are dangerous “predators.”

TO CATCH A PREDATOR In fact, the term “predator” is a misnomer because if that term is used, it should define an offender who has a history of sexual crimes and who is likely to commit them in the future.

ON-LINE PREDATORS? Many of these “On-Line” offenders are non-contact offenders, who either possess pornography and/or are caught attempting to set up a meeting with an underage person. These offenders are more likely than not to be low risk sex offenders who do not have a history of sex offending and who often have other motives to their sexual offending other than sexual deviance.

ONLINE SOLICITATION PUBLIC IMPRESSION
Internet pedophiles have moved from the playground to the bedroom internet connection targeting young children by pretending to be other children, who lie about their ages, identities, and motives, who deceive children to provide phone numbers and addresses, who use MySpace and face book as contact venues, and who use this information to stalk, abduct, rape, and sometimes murder these children

The TRUTH -Predominant online sex crimes victims are teenagers not children -Predominant crime scene scenario does not involve stranger molesters posing online as other children in order to set up an abduction and sexual assault -Only 5% of online sex crimes against children involved violence when meetings occurred, only 3% included abduction - Online offenders are generally not pedophiles -Of 6594 arrests for statutory rape, internet initiated sex crimes account for 7% of statutory rapes - 5% of the offenders truly concealed the fact that they were adults from their victims -80% were quite explicit about their sexual intentions towards the children Finkelhor, 2007; Wolak, Finkelhor, Mitchell, Ybarra, 2008

INTERNET PREDATOR' STEREOTYPES DEBUNKED IN NEW STUDY First National Juvenile Online Victimization Study (N-JOV) Internet offenders pretended to be teenagers in only 5 percent of the crimes studied by researchers. Nearly 75 percent of victims who met offenders face-to-face did so more than once. Online sex offenders are seldom violent, and cases involving stalking or abduction are very rare. Youth who engaged in four or more risky online behaviors were much more likely to report receiving online sexual solicitations. The online risky behaviors included maintaining buddy lists that included strangers, discussing sex online with people they did not know in person and being rude or nasty online. Boys who are gay or are questioning their sexuality may be more susceptible to Internet-initiated sex crimes than other populations. Researchers found boys were the victims in nearly one-quarter of criminal cases, and most cases included facts that suggested victims were gay or questioning their sexuality.

USE OF THE INTERNET Seduce or groom by having conversations, eventually sexual in nature, sending sexual pictures, or holding child on lap while viewing pornography, or illustrating how to perform sexual acts Child pornography productions- using internet as a tool to distribute child pornography, i.e., downloading from Limewire, or posting your own pictures you created

USE OF INTERNET 3) Arrange meetings or other communication-set up time and locations for meetings 4) Reward- attracting victims to home with promises of internet use 5) Advertise or sell- advertising victims for prostitution, offering minors to other offenders

Internet mechanisms that may promote offending
Internet facilitates exposure to child porn Easy access to internet groups that endorse legitimacy of sexual interest in underage youth Websites allow avenues for offenders to tirade pornography and motivate some to molest and produce new images of trade gaining status for sex offenders Anonymity that internet affords offenders who can groom and seduce victims from their home than from the street Chatrooms offer easy and quick contact with youths

ONLINE CHILD MOLESTES ARE GENERALLY NOT PEDOPHILES
Online child molesters target adolescents not young children/prepubescents- most sex offenders are not sexually deviant- sexually attracted to prepubescent children Difficult for online offender to target prepubescent children because young children are online less, are supervised, and developmentally are less interested in relationships, sex, romance, than are adolescents.

Internet initiated sex crimes against minors
These crimes are usually not violent crimes, rather criminal/sexual seductions in which the offenders lure teens to meet for sexual encounters that play on the teens’ desires for thrill, romance, sexual information, understanding. These teens that meet the offenders are often troubled with histories of family turmoil and sexual/physical abuse. Wolak, Finkelhor, Mitchell, 2004

Internet Sex Crimes Against Minors: The Response of Law Enforcement
Internet crimes against identified victims involving internet related sexual assaults and other sex crimes such as production of child porn committed against identifiable victims -39% of arrests Internet solicitations to law enforcement posing as minors involving NO identified victims – 25% of arrests Possession, distribution or trading internet child porn by offenders who did not use internet to sexually exploit identified victims or solicit undercover agents- 36% of arrests

Age of offender- 17 or younger 3% 18-25 11% 26-39 45% 40 or older 41%
Internet Sex Crimes Against Minors: The Response of Law Enforcement Profiles of Offender and Offenses Age of offender- 17 or younger 3% % % 40 or older %

Profiles of Offender and Offenses
-Acted alone in crime % -Prior arrests for sex against children 10% -Known to be violent % -Possessed child porn % -Distributed child porn % -Solicited undercover officer % -Committed sex crime identified victim 45%

Characteristics of Victims and Dynamics of Internet-initiated sex crimes
-The teens are usually girls between years of age (75%). -The offenders are older than 25 (76%). -In 73% of the crimes the youth meet the offender on multiple occasions for multiple sexual encounters. -About half of the victims were described by police as in love with or feeling close with the offender. In about 25% of these cases, the child ran away to be with the offender.

Most offenders did not deceive victims about the fact they were adults who were interested in sexual relationships and most victims met and had sex with the adults on more than one occasion. 76% first encounters are in online chat rooms. (teen oriented sites, geographic locations, related to dating romance, to gays, and in few cases sites related to sexual encounters between adults and minors)

Offender Deception -5% of offenders represented themselves online as peers of victims by claiming they were 17 or younger. 25% lowered there ages but still represented themselves as much older than their target victims -Deception about sexual motives was uncommon, 21% of offenders misrepresented or hid movies, but most of the deceivers were open about their wanting sex from the victims. Most misrepresentations involved insincere promises of love and romance. -26% lied about their physical appearance or other aspects of identity

-Offender met victim in chatroom 76%
Characteristics of Victims and Dynamics of Internet-initiated sex crimes -Offender met victim in chatroom 76% -Offender communicated more than 1-6 months 48% -Offender and victim communicated online multiple ways 77% -Offender talked to victim by phone 79% -Offender sent pictures to victim 48% -Offender gave or offered victim $ gifts 47%

-Offender engaged in cybersex with victim 20% -Offender sent sexual pictures to victim 18% -Offender transmitted adult pornography to victim 10% -Offender transmitted child pornography to victim 9% -Sexual offense was committed at face to face meeting 93% -Distance victim traveled to initial meeting 10 or less miles 52%

-Distance offender or victim traveled more than 50 miles 50% -Offender crossed state line or international boundary 31% -Initial face to face meeting- public place 46%, hotel, 13%, offender’s home 19% victim’s home 20% -Victim went somewhere with offender 83% -Offender met victim more than once 73%

-Most serious sexual offense committed-
Noncontact 1% Fondling 3% Oral sex 18% Intercourse or other penetration 71% Offender used violence or threat of violence 5% Offender used coercion 16%

Crime characteristics and aggravating factors
-Victim was abducted moved more than 50 feet against will 3% -Illegally detained 8% -Injured by any means 2% -Victim reported missing to law enforcement 29% -Victim offered or given illegal drugs or alcohol 40% -Victim exposed to adult porn 23% -Victim exposed to child porn 15% -Victim photographed in a suggestive or sexual pose 21%

Risk factors for the most serious online sexual solicitations
-being female -using chat rooms -using the internet with cell phone -talking with people met online -sending personal information to those met online -talking about sex online -experiencing offline physical and sexual abuse Mitchell, Finkelhor, Wolak, 2007

Who reports crime? National Crime Victimization Survey found that 28% of violent crimes against juveniles ages become known to the police vs. 48% of crimes towards adults The younger the victim, the more underreporting

WHY? More likely to have reports when:
The victim is adolescent v. preadolescent Adult and multiple offenders Physical injuries Female victims Families have prior contacts with police Believing the police would take situation seriously Believing child still is in danger

TYPES OF ONLINE STINGS 1) PROACTIVE
The National Juvenile Online Victimization Survey has studied law enforcement investigations of Internet sex crimes against minors. Each year, one in five youth encounter online solicitations that are sexual in nature via chat-rooms or instant messaging routes.

PROACTIVE INVESTIGATIONS
Law enforcement agents posts profile on Internet or goes into chatroom posing as girl or boy usually 13-15, and waits to be contacted by adult seeking young teen for sexual encounter. Investigator responds to conversation initiated by offender and allows offender to develop relationship that culminates in face to face meeting where offender is arrested. Investigator is careful not to initiate talk about sexual topics or propose sexual activity.

Proactive Investigations
Agent uses investigative resources to track down the identify of the offender and keep logs of all online interactions which constitute evidence of the crime.

To proactively catch a predator

The offender is charged with attempted sexual assault, illegal use of a computer to solicit a minor, and sometimes possession and distribution of child pornography

The legal decisions pertaining to entrapment in undercover drug operations apply to internet undercover operations. Investigators may not improperly induce a person to commit a criminal act.

These cases are referred to as proactive because they allow law enforcement to act without waiting for an offender to commit a crime against a real juvenile victim.

25% of all arrests for Internet sex crimes against minors were due to “proactive” investigations where police pose online as minors or pretend to be mothers teaching their children about sex.[i] [i] K. Mitchell, J. Wolak, & D. Finkelhor. (2005). Police Posing as Juveniles Online to Catch Sex Offenders: Is it Working? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, Vol. 17(3).

Federal agencies 19% Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces 18% State, county, or legal agencies 60% Probation and parole agencies 3%

2) Reactive Investigations
Undercover investigations can be referred to as “reactive” or “take over” when police learn of a solicitation with a real juvenile victim and they then pose as the original minor and target the suspect.

Internet Sex Crimes In the year 2000, one quarter (644) of the Internet sex crimes against juveniles (about 2500 total arrests) were based on proactive investigation. -Other arrests were for crimes committed by the offenders who met the juveniles online (20%), -Other sex crimes committed against juveniles by family members or acquaintances against juvenile victims (19%), -and the possession, distribution, or trading of pornography on the Internet (36% of arrests).

HOW DO THEY MEET IN PROACTIVE INVESTIGATIONS
-Most investigators posed as female adolescents 80% of the time with 98% posing as age 12 or older. -Most investigators first met their targets in chat rooms or through internet relay chat 56% or through instant messages 31%. -Nearly half of all investigations began in sex oriented chat rooms 87% of those that begin in chat rooms began in sex oriented chat rooms.

Communicating with the cop
-Multiple forms of online communication between targets and investigators were seen in 87% of these investigations, i.e., chat rooms 55% instant messages 79% and 82%. -The length of time the investigator communicated with the targets was usually short, one month or less 59% and between 1 and 6 months 37%.

-The number of online interactions between the online persona and target was usually 10 or less 46% or between 11 and 30 44%. -The targets often brought sex related items to the meetings 63% of cases resulting in meetings and 48% of all cases, such as contraceptives and lubricant or sexual devices, i.e., dildo

Comparison between Proactive and Reactive Cases
-The investigators posing online were slightly younger than the juvenile victims 13.8 vs. 14.4 -Online targets met over half of the investigators in chat rooms 56% compared to 79% of the offenders with juvenile victims but were more likely to have met through instant messages 31% vs. 11%. -Proactive contacts involve more sexually explicit contact often through sex oriented chat rooms whereas in juvenile victim cases, there are geographically focused chat rooms.

How do they meet? -Online targets were more likely to have met the investigator in sexually oriented chat rooms 48% vs. 15%. The chat rooms in the juvenile victim cases were less likely to be sexually oriented. -Proactive investigations tended to develop more quickly than the juvenile victim cases with over half 59% of the communication occurring for one month or less versus 30% for the juvenile victim cases. -Juvenile victim cases had more contact between victim and offender than in proactive cases.

How dangerous are those arrested in proactive investigations?
Proactive offenders have: Less adult related sexually deviant behavior Less known violence Fewer prior arrests for sexual and nonsexual offending Less deviant and dangerous than those in reactive investigations

Dangerousness -13% of offenders arrested in proactive stings had committed crimes involving online victims, -13% had physically molested a minor as well. -About 50% of proactive offenders were found to possess child pornography.

Demographic differences between proactive and reactive offenders
Proactive offenders at the time of their crimes were likely to be: - older 37.7 vs. 34.7, -have higher income levels, -be employed full time, -be married, and -have limited with minors, mostly as parents or relatives.

Are suspects in online investigations being successfully prosecuted?
Prosecutors involved in proactive cases 68% vs. 46%. 94% of proactive suspects charged with at least one felony, 15% went to trial and 91% resulted in pleas. Rates about the same for juvenile victim cases

PLEA BARGAINS 56% of proactive 42% reactive pled to a lesser charge or fewer counts. Characteristics of the defendant that contributed to plea bargains included: 1)lack of prior child molestation history, 2) cooperation, 3) remorse, 4)lack of criminal history, 5) willingness for treatment

Pretrial Issues 82% of proactive and 63% of reactive cases were released on bail or personal recognizance. Pretrial issues 44% proactive 48% reactive Search seizure of computer 27% v. 19% Search and forensic analysis of computer related equipment 18% vs. 10% Defendant was role playing or engaging in fantasy 35% vs. 21% Offense was a factual or legal impossibility 41% vs. 8% Defendant claimed to be helping the victim 21% vs. 23% Entrapment issues of the police officer proactive investigations 44%

SENTENCING -Incarceration 68% proactive vs. 73% reactive
-Common: fine, registry as sex offender, restrictions of internet use, access to pornography, contact with minors, alcohol and drug use, forfeiture, and mental health treatment requirement and DNA sample. -Most offenders sentenced to 1 month to 1 yr. incarceration 35% vs. 27% and between 2-5 years probation 53% to 27%

Problems with prosecution 23% proactive cases vs. 19% reactive
Entrapment 12% proactive cases Problems with search or evidence 6% proactive Investigator experience 3% proactive Investigation not being thorough 3% proactive

Characteristics of Proactive and Reactive Offenders
1) Proactive offenders had a history of violence 3%. -They had fewer arrests for nonsexual offenses 13% vs. 26% 2) sexual offenses against minors 4% vs. 11%. -Offenders in both categories had equally high rates of child pornography possession 41% for proactive offenders vs. 39% of reactive offenders with real juvenile victims 3) both groups had same alcohol and drug use problems 15%.

Criminal Defenses Entrapment Role playing or fantasy
Crime is a factual or legal impossibility Lack of intent (possession) Defendant’s claim of helping victim Defendant's mental illness/substance use Blame of internet addiction

Successful Prosecutions
Unrealistic defenses Aspects of police investigations Findings of key evidence Solid computer forensics Well conducted police investigations Having a good search warrant

FORENSIC SEX OFFENDER EVALUATION
Pornography and importuning offenders are often a different ‘breed’ of sex offender. These offenders often do not have a prior sex offense history. They rarely possess an antisocial personality disorder and frequently do not qualify for pedophilia.

They may possess symptoms that fall in the following categories:
Paraphilias (sexual deviancy disorders, i.e., pedophilia) Hypersexual disorders Obsessive compulsive disorders/Impulse Control Disorders Online sexual problems/addictions Other psychiatric disorders such as depression that include features of emotional loneliness and isolation or stem from environmental issues such as broken marriage and loss of employment. They may cope with these problems through inappropriate sexual activity.

PEDOPHILIA The most relevant paraphilic disorder concerning pornography offenders and importuners would be pedophilia. One must experience recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children, generally age 13 years or younger for a period of 6 months or longer, and it must cause them impairment in social, occupational, or other areas of functioning

Pedophilia All too often, a defendant is contacted by a law enforcement officer who imposters a 12 year old girl. The age of 12 is usually used to fulfill two purposes: to establish an age relevant to pedophilia and also to satisfy harsher penalties under sex offender laws. When considering this diagnosis, an expert should view all pornographic images to consider the ages of the children/adolescents as many of these pictures will be of teens older than age 13.

Pedophilia and Child Pornography
The expert must determine if the individual was viewing pornography for 6 months or longer. One can technically be diagnosed with pedophilia by viewing child pornography (and not actually engaging in hands-on offending of youth). Such use must cause them impairment in social, occupational, or other areas of functioning

Alternatives to Pedophilia?
Hypersexual disorders include a disturbance of more conventional sexual functioning such as masturbating or the use of pornography and at some point the use is compulsive and/or excessive and causes the person distress. Hypersexual disorders may also include cybersex (Internet related activities geared for sexual arousal and attracting others online).

Obsessive compulsive sexual behaviors
Paraphilias and hypersexual disorders have also been considered to fall under the psychiatric genre of obsessive-compulsive disorders and impulse control disorders.[i] The obsession may be the intrusive thoughts about pornography and the compulsion may be the repetitive masturbation to the images and the use of the computer. These behaviors are hallmarked by their impulsive nature and likely represent addictions that are motivated by intense drive states.[ii] [i] Krueger, R., & Kaplan, M. (2001). The Paraphilic and Hypersexual Disorders: An Overview. Journal of Psychiatric Practice. [ii] Schwartz, M.F. & Southern, S. (2000). Compulsive cybersex: The new tea room. In A. Cooper (Ed.), Cybersex: The dark side of the force (pp ). New York: Taylor and Francis.

Alternatives to Pedophilia
Importantly for pornography and importuning sex offenders, many of these individuals will teeter between sexual behavior that is socially acceptable and not abnormal, and behavior that becomes pathological when the person suffers distress or impairment in functioning.

Discerning Abnormal and Pathological: Ask the Expert
Multiple child victims Stranger victims Male victims Over-identification with children Never married Possession of significant amounts of child pornography Log times on computer Log times of opening child porn files dialogue with other sex offenders i.e., file sharing histories with children i.e., grooming behaviors Prior sex offenses against children

Establishing abnormality
Self-reported statements to treatment providers and probation officers about inability to control urges Termination from prior sex offender treatment Historically and currently meets criteria for a paraphilia diagnosis and preferably multiple paraphilias Frequent acts of sexual violence within a closely proximate period of time when at risk in the community (while on supervision or while participating in outpatient sex offender treatment programming)

Difficulties controlling and volitional impairments
Offender sexually reoffends while he is participating in a sex offender treatment program Offender engages in behavior when he is aware of a high probability of getting apprehended Offender actively grooms a victim in the presence of an adult Sexual offending while in prison or awaiting civil commitment hearings

Abnormal and pathological
Offender lacks insight and understanding into his offending behavior Offender lacks control of his behavior when it is unreasonable to expect him to engage or not engage in a certain act under his particular circumstances (considering context of offender’s offending patterns) Offender sexually acts out to relieve overwhelming anxiety and distress Offender’s strength of sexual desire interferes with his ability to consider alternative courses of action and decision/ability not to offend

INTERNET ADDICTION & EMOTIONAL AVOIDANCE
Many offenders who have possessed pornography on their computers and engaged in cyber-chat with underage females use the Internet to avoid negative emotional states, such as depression, anxiety, anger, boredom, and loneliness.[i] This is a critical point because these offenders may not be sexually deviant, rather they use sex as an outlet to deal with these emotional and intimacy deficits, anger, boredom, sexual dysfunction, job stressors, domestic violence, etc. [i] Quayle, E., Vaughan, M., & Taylor, M. (2006). Sex offenders, Internet child abuse images and emotional avoidance: The importance of values. Aggression and Violent Behavior (11).

The Electronic Bedroom
The Internet serves as a device to: access sexual material which ultimately assists in relieving one’s sexual arousal and alleviating emotional distress and dissatisfaction in one’s life. The Internet offers sex offenders an avenue to download pornography and masturbate to images which is in effect a rewarding and reinforcing process leading to further avoidance from dealing with one’s problems and human relationships.[i] This Internet behavior has an addictive quality with the subconscious process of avoiding negative emotional states. [i] Greenfield, D., & Orzack, M. (2002). The Electronic Bedroom: Clinical Assessment of Online Sexual Problems and Internet-Enabled Sexual Behavior. In A. Cooper (Ed.), Sex and the Internet: A Guidebook for Clinicians (pp ).

Internet Addiction? Dependence & Withdrawal Symptoms
Internet addiction includes an individual who has obsessive thoughts about the Internet and has volitional problems controlling Internet use leading to excessive amounts of time online and failure to meet the demands of their everyday life. They will likely experience negative emotional states when offline and increasing tolerance to the effects of being online while denying problematic behaviors in their lives.

Internet Dependence? The Reinforcement of Behavior Sequence
When online, they will have more positive feelings about themselves. This Internet addiction includes a behavioral sequence that has a rewarding and reinforcing quality that mimics an impulse control disorder such as Kleptomania. the images that stimulate sexual arousal, the anonymity with the computer use including anonymous chat rooms and typing on the computer pornographic images serving as arousing stimuli to masturbate to leading to orgasm

Anonymity, Low Self-Esteem, and Rejection
An important feature, the anonymity of the computer use which includes having relationships with others, is critical to many of these offenders, perhaps especially the online solicitors. These offenders often lack relationships or are involved in dissatisfied and conflictual relationships/marriages and the chat rooms allow an outlet to have connections with others.

Looking for Love: The Exhibitionist Case Study
This connection with others which may be legal (exposing oneself through webcams to other consenting adults) may be reinforcing and have an addictive quality. The adult male who searches for consenting women to view his ‘show’ may have a difficult time finding these women online. He may be afraid that the individuals he is exposing himself to are in fact homosexual men posing as women.

Curiosity the Killer His exposing activities which may not qualify for exhibitionism (because the viewers are not ‘unsuspecting strangers’) may be reinforcing to him when he does find viewers he deems appropriate. However, given his emotional deficits and need for anonymous connection, this type of offender is often vulnerable to an instant sex connection with an online law enforcement agent who he thinks is an adolescent female.

INTERNET ADDICTION? Investing more time in internet behaviors to the detriment of other behaviors Negative feelings when offline Increasing tolerance to the effect of being online Denial of a problem

Krone’s typology of Internet offenders
Browser- response to spam, accidental hits on suspect site, material knowingly saved Private fantasy- conscious creation of online text of digital images for private use Trawler-actively seeking child porn using openly available browsers Non-secure collector- actively seeking material often through peer to peer networks

Typology of Internet Offenders
5) Secure collector- actively seeking material bout through secure networks. 6) Groomer- cultivating online relationship with one or more children. The offender may or may not seek material in any of the above ways. Porn may be used to facilitate abuse 7) Physical abuser- abusing a child who may have been introduced to the offender online. The offender may or may not seek material in any of the above ways. Porn may be used to facilitate abuse 8) Distributor- may distribute any of the above levels

Online sexual activities
Masturbating while viewing images on screen Networking, downloading trading, swapping images Role-playing- often defendant will search for an adult woman role playing a girl Downloading and writing stories, usually incest stories Online grooming seducing child on line Distributing photographs and videos the offender has taken of a live victim they are physically offending

Precursors and triggers to offending
Interpersonal problems, divorce, intimacy deficits, loneliness, boredom Health related problems, illnesses, substance abuse Sexual factors- frustration and dissatisfaction with partner, lack of quantity, not able to live out fantasies Work related problems and stress, financial difficulties unemployment, boredom, overwork Self-esteem problems, difficulty dealing with depression, anger

CHILD PORNOGRAPHY

Types of pornography Indicative- material depicting clothed children suggesting a sexual interest in children Indecent – material depicting naked children suggesting a sexual interesting in children Obscene- material which depicts children in explicit sexual acts

FUNCTION OF CHILD PORN Pornography as a means of sexual arousal and aid in fantasy enhancing masturbation practices Way of avoiding real life and inducing social isolation As a collecting behavior Way of facilitating social relationships with other child porn possessors

What motivates child porn possessors
Sexually interested in prepubescent children (pedophiles) or young adolescents (hebephiles) who use child porn images for sexual fantasy Sexually indiscriminant who are constantly looking for new and different sexual stimuli Sexually curious downloading a few images to satisfy curiosity Interested in profiting financially by selling images or setting up website requiring payment for access

Taxonomy of child pornography
Indicative- non-erotic non-sexualized pictures showing children in underwear, swimming costumes, pics of children playing in normal settings- context or organization of pictures by the collector indicates inappropriateness Nudist- Pictures of naked or semi naked children in appropriate nudist settings from legitimate sources

Taxonomy of child pornography
3) Erotica- Taking photos of children in play areas or other safe environments showing either underwear or varying degrees of nakedness 4) Posing- deliberately posed pictures of fully, partially, clothed or naked children where amount, context, and organization suggests sexual interest 5) Erotic posing- deliberately posed pictures of fully, partially clothed or naked children in sexualized or provocative poses

Taxonomy of Child Pornography
6) Explicit erotic posing- emphasizing genital areas where the child is either naked, partially or fully clothed 7) Explicit sexual activity- involves touching, mutual and self-masturbation, oral sex and intercourse by child, not involving adult 8) Assault- pictures of children being subject to a sexual assault, involving digital toughing involving an adult

Taxonomy of Child Pornography
9) Gross Assault- grossly obscene pictures of sexual assault, involving penetrative sex, masturbation or oral sex involving an adult 10) Sadistic/bestiality- Pictures showing a child being tied, bound or otherwise subject to something that implies pain, or pictures where an animal is involved in some form of sexual behavior with a child

DOJ Study: Child Porn Possessors Arrested in Internet-Related Crimes
Law enforcement agencies made 1713 arrests for internet related crimes involving possession of child porn during 12 moths July 2000-July 2001 Those arrested 91% white, 86% over 25 Most had images of prepubescent children and images graphically depicting sexual penetration 80%, 92% images of minors focusing on genital or showing explicit sexual activity, 83% images 6-12 years, 75% images 13-17, 39% had images of 3-5 year and 19% had images of 3-5year and 19% images younger than 3 21% of those arrested had images depicting sexual violence to children such as rape, bondage, torture 39% had at least 1 video with moving images of child porn

Child Porn Possessors Arrested in Internet-Related Crimes
53% were arrested as possession or distribution cases, 31% arose as cases of child sexual victimization, and 16% arouse as internet solicitations to undercover investigators 40% of arrested child porn possessors were dual offenders who sexually victimized children and possessed porn, with both crimes discovered in same investigation. Additional 15% were dual offenders who attempted to sexually victimize children by solicitation undercover investigators who posed online as minors

Child Porn Possessors Arrested in Internet-Related Crimes
3) 1/6 investigations beginning with allegations of child porn possession turned into dual offenders 4) 39% of arrested offenders who met victims online and 43% of offenders who solicited undercover investigators were dual offenders 5) 96% of child porn possessors were convicted or plead guilty and 59% were incarcerated

DOJ STUDY: Child Pornography Possessors Arrested in Internet-Related Crimes (2005)

Does child pornography use lead to hands-on sex offending?
Researchers suggest that Internet offenders may fall into 3 categories including: collecting pornography as part of a larger pattern of sexual offending; collecting to feed a developing sexual interest in children; and accessing indecent images of children out of curiosity.[1] Importantly, the expert evaluating offenders with illegal possession of child pornography must be able to distinguish higher risk offenders with an affinity for child pornography and a significant deviant sexual drive towards children versus the offender who “got caught up” in online trade and possession of child pornography which was fueled in part by curiosity, social isolation, and need for power.[2] [1] J. Sullivan & A. Beech. Assessing internet offenders. In M. Calder (Ed.) child sexual abuse and the internet: tackling the new frontier (p ) (2004). [2] See United States Department of Justice. Office of Community Oriented Policy Services. Problem oriented guides for police. Problem-Specific Guides Series. No

Possible associations between pornography use and the sexual abuse of children:
Pornography use is an expression of existing sexual interests Pornography is used to prime the individual to offend Pornography has a corrosive effect (prolonged use of child pornography includes increased use, increased attraction to images and desensitized views of harm to victims)

Associations between pornography use and the sexual abuse of children:
Pornography has a cathartic effect (viewing pornography is the sole outlet for an individual’s attraction to children) Pornography is a by-product of pedophilia Pornography plays a role in generating inappropriate sexual fantasies in the viewing and stimulating sexual arousal When the viewer masturbates to porn, this reinforces his sexual response to it and encourages repetition

PORNOGRAPHY’S LINK TO OFFENDING
Pornography use can escalate to the commission of hands-on contact offenses through the processes of: downloading and collecting of images viewing of images, distributing of images, and the fantasy and masturbation towards the images. Viewing of non-violent and violent pornography may increase aggression and rape myth acceptance.

Most studies do not reveal a causal link between use of pornography and contact sex offenses.

Pornography and Offending?
Some child molesters commit a contact sex offense against a child in order to have proximity with them to produce pornographic material with the goal of viewing and/or distributing. Viewing child pornography and masturbating towards images may be a substitute for a hands-on sex offense against a child. In fact, one author studied men who were attracted to male child pornography and found that they self-reported that viewing child pornography was a substitute for hands-on offending and it did not lead to an increase in seeking out boys to satisfy sexual needs [9] D. Carter, R. Prentky, R. Knight, P. Vanderveer, & R. Boucher. The Use of Pornography in the Criminal and Developmental Histories of Sexual Offenders. J. of Interpersonal Violence Vol. 2(2) (1997). [10] Id. [11] See supra note 121. M. Seto. pedophilia and sexual offending against children. theory, assessment, and intervention. (2008). The author cites that about 34% of 1807 child pornography offenders arrested between 1997 and 2004 had a record contact sexual offending or had engaged in an attempt to contact a child for sexual purposes (data from the U.S. Postal Inspection Service). [ [16] See V. Vega & N. Malamuth. Predicting sexual aggression: The role of pornography in the context of general and specific risk factors. aggressive behavior vol (2007). The authors found that high pornography consumption added significantly to the prediction of sexual aggression.

Use of pornography during the hands on offense
15% to 42% of sex offenders use pornography during their offenses. The majority of these cases involve child victims and pedophilic offenders

Pornography and Hands-on Offending
Small groups of sex offenders, perhaps about 10%, have admitted using pornography as an element to the preparation of a hands-on sex offense or as part of the sex offense itself. Most likely, those sex offenders with many risk factors to reoffend may be more vulnerable in utilizing pornography as a catalyst to their hands-on offending patterns.

Pornography and Hands On Offending
A recent study indicated that 47% of offenders had pornography in their possession, yet 17% of sex offenders (incest offenders, offenders against children, offenders against adults, and exhibitionists) utilized pornography in their sex offenses, and of the users, 13% used pornography to stimulate themselves to commit a hands-on sex crime, 55% showed pornographic material to their victims, and 36% took pictures, mostly of child victims. About 25% of the extrafamilial offenders against boys and 29% of the incest offenders against girls utilized pornography during the commissions of their crimes. Langevin & Curnoe, 2004

Pornography: Child molesters v. Rapists
When considering child molester and rapist groups, both have similar rates of exposure to pornography in the home or during their developmental years. However, child molesters are more likely than rapists to utilize pornography in adulthood and use materials prior to and during their offenses.

Those child molesters who had been sexually assaulted during childhood and when the perpetrator used pornographic materials, they were more likely to have followed similar behavior patterns during their sex offenses as perpetrators. Child molesters are more likely to utilize pornography to relieve the impulse to commit a sex offense than are rapists.

Pornography and Hands-on Offending
Unpublished and published data has indicated that about one third of men who use child pornography have previously committed sexual offenses against children. Before internet, about 20% to 33% of offenders arrested for child porn were also involved in actual sexual abuse

National Juvenile Online Victimization Study data has revealed that 40% of the cases involving child pornography possession included “dual offenders” who not only possessed illegal pornography but victimized a child in the same investigation.

While 27% of dual offenders showed or gave child pornography to children in a grooming type fashion, 9% of the dual offenders sent child pornography to undercover officers posing as juveniles. Interestingly, 25% of the dual offenders admitted to grooming (interest a victim in, or overcome inhibitions about sexual activity.)”

Further data reveal that child pornography offenders who organized their collections or who distributed pornography differed from offenders in being more likely to have 1,000 more images of child pornography and images of children under age 6. However, no studies have supported the effect of child pornography use and hands-on offending even with this more deviant group.

There is scant research on the criminal histories and later offending of child pornography offenders. At least one study has indicated that offenders who accessed child pornography often had no prior criminal background.

Criminal Recidivism of Child Porn Offenders
Research reveals that child pornography offenders with prior criminal records were significantly more likely to offend in various ways (general, violent, and sexual offenses). Eke & Seto 2007

About a quarter of the sample of pornography offenders had prior contact sex offenses and 15% had prior child pornography offenses. After an average time at risk of 29.7 months, 17% of the sample had reoffended. Only 9% of the contact sex offenders committed a further contact sexual offense and 5% committed a further pornography offense.

Past behavior predicts future behavior
In contrast, 1% of the child pornography only offenders escalated to committing a contact sexual reoffense and 4% committed a further pornography offense. Those child pornography offenders who had committed a prior or concurrent contact sex offense were the most likely to offend again, either generally or sexually. As expected, a history of contact sex offenses is predictive of future hands-on sex offenses even with pornography type offenders.

Predictors of any recidivism for child porn offenders 33%
Any probation or release failure prior or at index Any prior offense # of index nonviolent offenses # of prior nonviolent offenses Younger age Child porn offenders only, lower risk

Child Porn Offender Recidivism
Child porn offenders reoffend less than those with prior offenses Criminal history variables significantly predict recidivism including sexual recidivism Common child porn offenders release failures involve children and or using computers

Child pornography offenders vs. Child Molesters
1) CP reported more psychological difficulties in adulthood and fewer prior sexual convictions 2) Child molesters much more likely to commit offenses (any recidivism) in the community than CP offenders 3) CP offenders younger, and less psychopathic traits [3] L. Webb et al. Characteristics of internet child pornography offenders: A comparison with child molesters. sex abuse (2007).

Federal Sentencing and Downward Departure 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
If the client is facing a mandatory minimum sentence, then the minimum sentence is generally the lower limit as to what they can receive. That can only be avoided if they go to trial and win, or cooperate in another investigation (cooperation reductions are also governed by Section 3553). As to departures and variances, you generally consider the sentencing guidelines first to see if there are any available avenues for downward departure (in child porn cases, they are basically non-existent). Then you consider to determine if any one or more of the factors listed warrants a downward variance, even if the guidelines would not allow a departure on the same grounds.

FORENSIC SEX OFFENDER EVALUATION: Getting that downward departure
Experienced forensic clinician with history of evaluating many different sex offenders and sexual disorders- civil commitment, community notification, AWA, mitigation Pedophilia as a pejorative and prejudicial diagnosis Other psychiatric, psychological, and environmental factors contributing to the offending Expert knowledgeable in sex offender risk assessment Expert reviewing child pornography images with state/federal agent and prosecutor, collections, time viewing, etc. Treatment amenability Risk management

HETEROGENEITY OF SEX OFFENDERS
There are several distinctions or classes of sex offenders including but not limited to: Rapists Child Molesters Child pornography possessors Hebephiles (sex offenders perpetrating post-pubescent females, years of age Crossover sexual offenders- individuals whose victims are from multiple age, gender, and relationship categories

Types of Sex Offenders Sex offenders who have engaged in hands on sex offending and pornography possession Non-contact sex offenders including voyeurs (peeping type offenders and exhibitionists) Non-contact pornography possession offenders and Internet solicitation (Importuning) offenders.

The Expert Witness Must Have a History of Working with Various Types of Sex Offenders and a Strong Knowledge Base Relevant to Risk Assessment

It is recommended that the attorney representing pornography possessing offenders and importuners be aware of their client’s typology as a sex offender. This class of offender is much different than the traditional contact sex offending rapist and child molester.

The representation of their client necessitates working within a multidisciplinary team of experts. This process must be a cohesive one with various experts relying on each other to not only authenticate the evidence but to understand the mindset of the defendant, the etiology of his offending patterns, and the steps to rehabilitation.

Risk Assessment The forensic psychologist must know when to and when not to apply actuarial risk assessment instruments. Dynamic and changeable risk factors must be intensely investigated and made a target for intervention.

Pedophilia & Prejudice
Diagnostic criteria for Pedophilia A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger). B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty. C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A. Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old. Specify if: Sexually Attracted to Males Sexually Attracted to Females Sexually Attracted to Both Specify if: Limited to Incest Specify type: Exclusive Type (attracted only to children) Nonexclusive Type

Child Porn and Pedophilia
Child porn offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia Child pornography offenders showed a greater sexual arousal to children than to adults and differed from groups of sex offenders against children, sex offenders against adults. Child pornography offending is a stronger diagnostic indictor of pedophilia than is sexually offending against an adult Seto, Cantor, & Blanchard, 2006

The Forensic Psychologist Expert
Must Attempt to View the Pornography and/or Online Solicitation ( s and Instant Messages) to establish the presence of sexual deviance disorders and is relevant to risk assessment.

Accessing pornography as discovery
This may be a problem as the attorneys defending these cases nationally are struggling to obtain this data in discovery due to the laws making it illegal for them and their expert witnesses to possess it as part of their investigations.

If allowed to review this data, the forensic psychologist expert should foster a relationship with the computer forensic expert to become educated on what kind and how much pornography the defendant was viewing.

The expert witness should observe the log times and be aware of the amount of hard drive pace on the computer because it reflects the storage capacity. The person may have stored pornography on a USB hard drive, Thumb drive or Zip drive to increase storage capacity. The Web Browser History, Cookies, and Temporary Internet Files should be accessed to assess the defendant’s patterns of computer usage. Bookmarks such as the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), the Lewis Carroll Collector’s Guild or other similar sites advocating sex with minors may provide information to the expert on the defendant’s interests. Chat room activity and s should also be reviewed.

The Expert Should Be Aware of the Research Relevant to Pornography and it’s Equivocal Association to Sexual Reoffending There is little empirical evidence suggesting a direct causal link between pornography viewing and sex offending.

Pornography use can be neither a necessary nor sufficient cause of sexual offending because sexual offenses are usually committed by those offenders with little or no exposure to pornography. The role of pornography in sexual offenses requires additional triggering factors as well as predispositional and situational factors relevant to the onset of offending.

Treatment Treatment should likely entail four modalities:
Group sex offender treatment (relapse prevention/cognitive behavioral modality) Individual therapy to deal with issues such as depression, self-esteem, anger, relationship instability, and divorce. Marital therapy should also be considered Psychotropic medication, focusing on monoamine (norepinephrine, dopamine, and serotonin) metabolism. Medication may include serotonin reuptake inhibitors which modulate serotonin and decrease deviant sexual behavior, impulsivity, sexual appetite

Risk Management Global position satellite Intensive supervision
Counseling Substance abuse treatment Group sex offender programming Polygraph testing Aging

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, versus BRUCE CLAYTON PUGH, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 515 F.3d 1179; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 2077; The district court then cited to Warren's opinion that Pugh was not a pedophile and presented a low risk of re-offending, that Pugh would not benefit from a custodial sentence, and that Pugh was addicted to adult, but not child pornography. The court also noted that Pugh had not re-offended since his arrest and had been compliant with the court's pre-sentencing orders. The court contrasted Pugh's case with other defendants who pay for or actively solicit child pornography, and concluded that an "unusual sentence for an unusual case" was necessary, and that it was "convinced" that it would "never" see Pugh again.

The district court proceeded to sentence Pugh to a five-year probationary term on the conditions that Pugh (1) continue [**17] his mental health treatment; (2) not possess a computer with internet access; (3) consent to periodic, unannounced examinations of any computer equipment he possessed; (4) submit to searches based on reasonable suspicion; and (5) register with the state sex-offender registry.

After the district court denied the United State's motion to reconsider the sentence and impose either a sentence within the Guidelines, or a sentence of at least one day in prison followed by a life term of supervised release, the United States timely appealed the sentence arguing that it was so disproportionately light in view of the seriousness of the offense that it [*1188] amounted to an abuse of discretion, and was, therefore, unreasonable.

Young children were raped in order to enable the production of the pornography that the defendant both downloaded and uploaded -- both consumed himself and disseminated to others. The greater the customer demand for child pornography, the more that will be produced. Sentences influence behavior, or so at least Congress thought when in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) it made deterrence a statutory sentencing factor. The logic of deterrence suggests that the lighter the punishment for downloading and uploading child pornography, the greater the customer demand for it and so the more will be produced.

The legislative judgment, as well as the judgment found in the relevant literature, is that the use of children as subjects of pornographic materials [**41] is: harmful to the physiological, emotional, and mental health of the child It has been found that sexually exploited children are unable to develop healthy affectionate relationships in later life, have sexual dysfunctions, and have a tendency to become sexual abusers as adults. Sexual molestation by adults is often involved in the production of child sexual performances. When such performances are recorded [*1196] and distributed, the child's privacy interests are also invaded The distribution of photographs and films depicting sexual activity by juveniles is intrinsically related to the sexual abuse of children [T]he materials produced are a permanent record of the children's participation and the harm to the child is exacerbated by their circulation

As one authority has explained:
"[P]ornography poses an even greater threat to the child victim than does sexual abuse or prostitution. Because the child's actions are reduced to a recording, the pornography may haunt him in future years, long after the original misdeed took place. A child who has posed for a camera must go through life knowing that the recording is circulating within the mass distribution system for [**42] child pornography." ("[I]t is the fear of exposure and the tension of keeping the act secret that seem to have the most profound emotional repercussions"); ("The victim's knowledge of publication of the visual material increases the emotional and psychic harm suffered by the child"). Shouvlin, Preventing the Sexual Exploitation of Children: A Model Act, 17 Wake Forest L. Rev. 535, 545 (1981). See also [Schoettle, Child Exploitation: A Study of Child Pornography, 19 J. Am. Acad. Child Psychiatry 289, 292 (1980)]

Findings in the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996
Findings in the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 recognized that: "(1) the use of children in the production of sexually explicit material, including photographs, films, videos, computer images, and other visual depictions, is a form of sexual abuse which can result in physical or psychological harm, or both, to the children involved; (2) where children are used in its production, child pornography [**48] permanently records the victim's abuse, and its continued existence causes the child victims of sexual abuse continuing harm by haunting those children in future years; (3) child pornography is often used as part of a method of seducing other children into sexual activity; (7) the creation or distribution of child pornography which includes an image of a recognizable minor invades the child's privacy and reputational interests, since images that are created showing a child's face or other identifiable feature on a body engaging in sexually explicit conduct can haunt the minor for years to come; (10)(A) the existence of and traffic in child pornographic images creates the potential for many types of harm in the community and presents a clear and present danger to all children; and (B) it inflames the desires of child molesters, pedophiles, and child pornographers who prey on children, thereby increasing the creation and distribution of child pornography and the sexual abuse and exploitation of actual children who are victimized as a result of the existence and use of these materials; (11)(A) the sexualization and eroticization of minors through any form of child pornographic [**49] images has a deleterious effect on all children by encouraging a societal perception of children as sexual objects and leading to further sexual abuse and exploitation of them; and (B) this sexualization of minors creates an unwholesome environment which affects the psychological, mental and emotional development of children and undermines the efforts of parents and families to encourage the sound mental, moral and emotional development of children " Pub. L. No , § 121, 110 Stat (1996).

The legislative history in 2003 surrounding the enactment of Section 3583(k) reveals that "'Congress and the Sentencing Commission intended to impose life terms of supervised release on sex offenders. Congress explicitly recognized the high rate [**52] of recidivism in convicted sex offenders.'" Perrin, 478 F.3d at 678 (quoting Allison, 447 F.3d at 406 (citing in turn 18 U.S.C. § 3583(k); H.R. Rep. No , reprinted in 2003 U.S.C.C.A.N. 683 (2003) (conf. report))). The Fifth Circuit has explained: The legislative history of § 3583(k) states that the life term of supervised release was in response to the "long-standing concerns of Federal judges and prosecutors regarding the inadequacy of the existing supervision periods for sex offenders, particularly for the perpetrators of child sexual abuse crimes, whose criminal conduct may reflect deep-seated aberrant sexual disorders that are not likely to disappear within a few years of release from prison. The current length of the authorized supervision periods is not consistent with the need presented by many of these offenders for long-term and in some cases, life-long monitoring and oversight."

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, versus BRUCE CLAYTON PUGH, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 515 F.3d 1179; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 2077; The sentence failed to adequately promote general deterrence, reflect the seriousness of the offense, show respect for the law, or address relevant policy statements. It was unreasonable. Although the district court found defendant's conduct incidental and passive, his conduct was not isolated or unintentional. He downloaded and forwarded child pornography consciously, intentionally, and voluntarily, regardless of whether his end goal was to receive child pornography or if it was only a means for him to "chat" with others. The sentence undermined the purpose of general deterrence, a problem compounded not just because of the number of images downloaded over an extended time frame, but also because some images had been distributed to others. The sentence failed to reflect the seriousness of defendant's offense under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a)(2)(A); his computer had depraved images, and there were 10 known (and countless unknown) victims. The district court did not acknowledge that probation ordinarily was not available for the crime or that a life term of supervised release was recommended. And, the district court had departed 97 months for an offense with a range of months.

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Booker further held that in performing this review, we must measure "reasonableness" against the factors outlined by Congress in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). 6 Booker, 543 [*1189] U.S. at 261. [**20] The Supreme Court explained that the factors contained in Section 3553(a) would not only "guide" the district courts in sentencing, but that "[t]hose factors in turn will guide appellate courts, as they have in the past, in determining whether a sentence is unreasonable." Id.; accord Winingear, 422 F.3d at 1246; see also United States v. Talley, 431 F.3d 784, 788 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) ("We must evaluate whether the sentence imposed by the district court fails to achieve the purposes of sentencing as stated in section 3553(a)."). We have also held that HN3 the burden of establishing that a sentence is unreasonable lies with the party challenging the sentence. Talley, 431 F.3d at 788.

- 6 HN4 Section 3553(a) provides the following considerations for the court to consider: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; (2) the need for the sentence imposed-- (A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense; (B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and (D) to provide the defendant with [**21] needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner; (3) the kinds of sentences available; (4) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for the applicable category of offense committed by the applicable category of defendant as set forth in the guidelines[;] (5) any pertinent policy statement[;] (6) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct; and (7) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.

FEDERAL CIVIL COMMITMENT. 18 USCS § 4247 § 4247
FEDERAL CIVIL COMMITMENT? 18 USCS § § General provisions for chapter (a) Definitions. As used in this chapter [18 USCS §§ 4241 et seq.]-- (1) "rehabilitation program" includes-- (A) basic educational training that will assist the individual in understanding the society to which he will return and that will assist him in understanding the magnitude of his offense and its impact on society; (B) vocational training that will assist the individual in contributing to, and in participating in, the society to which he will return; (C) drug, alcohol, and sex offender treatment programs, and other treatment programs that will assist the individual in overcoming a psychological or physical dependence or any condition that makes the individual dangerous to others; and (D) organized physical sports and recreation programs; (2) "suitable facility" means a facility that is suitable to provide care or treatment given the nature of the offense and the characteristics of the defendant; (3) "State" includes the District of Columbia; (4) "bodily injury" includes sexual abuse; (5) "sexually dangerous person" means a person who has engaged or attempted to engage in sexually violent conduct or child molestation and who is sexually dangerous to others; and (6) "sexually dangerous to others" with respect a person, means that the person suffers from a serious mental illness, abnormality, or disorder as a result of which he would have serious difficulty in refraining from sexually violent conduct or child molestation if released.

(c) Psychiatric or psychological reports
(c) Psychiatric or psychological reports. A psychiatric or psychological report ordered pursuant to this chapter shall be prepared by the examiner designated to conduct the psychiatric or psychological examination, shall be filed with the court with copies provided to the counsel for the person examined and to the attorney for the Government, and shall include-- (1) the person's history and present symptoms; (2) a description of the psychiatric, psychological, and medical tests that were employed and their results; (3) the examiner's findings; and (4) the examiner's opinions as to diagnosis, prognosis, and-- (A) if the examination is ordered under section 4241 [18 USCS § 4241], whether the person is suffering from a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent that he is unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or to assist properly in his defense; (B) if the examination is ordered under section 4242 [18 USCS § 4242], whether the person was insane at the time of the offense charged; (C) if the examination is ordered under section 4243 or 4246 [18 USCS § 4243 or 4246], whether the person is suffering from a mental disease or defect as a result of which his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to property of another; (D) if the examination is ordered under section 4248 [18 USCS § 4248], whether the person is a sexually dangerous person;

ACDLA JOHN MATTHEW FABIAN, PSY.D., J.D., ABPP

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "ACDLA JOHN MATTHEW FABIAN, PSY.D., J.D., ABPP"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

ACDLA JOHN MATTHEW FABIAN, PSY.D., J.D., ABPP

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "ACDLA JOHN MATTHEW FABIAN, PSY.D., J.D., ABPP"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback