Criminal Justice, CMRJ515, CMRJ518, CMR527, & CMRJ531

CMRJ515 Prosecution and Legislation

1. Currently what would you identify as our best defense against child exploitation on the internet? Be sure to back up your thoughts with sources and citations.

 While offenders are motivated by various reasons to exploit children sexually, the best defense against child exploitation on the internet is the offender’s prior knowledge and intent to commit the crime. It is evident that, arguments against child exploitation have been used to pin down criminals engaged in child sexual exploitation. Most prosecutors base their arguments on the offenders’ “intent” to break the law while being fully aware about the harm they would cause the young ones for their own selfish gain. According to the American Bar Association (2018), criminals target their victims with the full knowledge of what they would achieve with their offensive internet activities. The association expounds that, offenders groom their victims from online platforms by targeting them, securing access to them and isolating their targets, gaining their trust, to control and conceal the ensuing relationship. Based on this view, the offenders are fully aware of their intentions. Their aim is not only to secure the victims but also to conceal information that could expose their plans to the targets.

The U.S. Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking has given a broad yet succinct definition of grooming to illustrate “intent” as an arguable aspect against child exploitation through the internet. It defined grooming as the approach used by the online offenders to build trust with the victim and isolate the target children to gain access to alone with them (American Bar Association, 2018). The process of building trust has to be intuitive in nature with the criminals taking strategic and calculative measures to avoid exposing their mission. All along, they understand their goal in securing lone time with their target victims. Kettleborough and Merdian (2017) noted that child exploitation offenders harbor the thoughts and selfish justifications that their “criminal activity” is a means to a certain end. In this case, they do not lure the children through the internet spontaneously but take time to plan and execute their intentions.

Surprisingly, some arguments indicate that “intent” is driven by extensive factors key among them a sense of entitlement. As Kettleborough and Merdian (2017) emphasized, most of the offenders using the internet to exploit children believe that they are entitled to fulfill their needs by mistreating the young unsuspecting individuals. In light of this view, the offenders consider themselves to be of greater significance than the children; that they have a right to exploit sexually them to their selfish desire. Williams (2015) asserted that, the criminal intent drives the criminals’ desire to establish a secretive relationship with their target criminals. He expounded that, although the relationship later becomes overtly abusive one, the offenders’ holistic “good Samaritan” approach preempts the victim’s ability to make informed decision. Eventually, the targeted children fall prey to the criminals whose intention is to exploit them sexually for personal gain.

Prosecutors present that, arguments on the criminals prior perceived “intent” to exploit the children sexually is often successful in convicting the offenders. Winters, Kaylor, and Jeglic (2017) explained that the success of the “intent” defense against child exploitation through the internet is grounded on the manipulation process applied by the criminals. The authors stressed that individuals would not manipulated others without proper knowledge about their goal and the means through which they would achieve their objectives. This assertion is in line with the Kettleborough and Merdian (2017) perspectives on online sexual grooming. Both points imply that, online sexual offenders manipulate the children into situations in which they can readily abuse them while concealing future disclosure. Thus, argument on “criminal intent and prior knowledge” is the best defense against child exploitation through the internet.

2.   What problems might investigators run into when interviewing a victim of child exploitation?

Presenting a watertight case against offenders accused on child sexual exploitation is the ultimate goal of all prosecutors. However, this feat could be achieved by obtaining precise and applicable information from the exploited minor. Surprisingly, the prosecutors run into different problems while interviewing the victims of child exploitation. Some of the challenges including misunderstanding the questions being asked. Evidently, the knowledge level of most minors is significantly lo to understand integral information sought from them by the prosecutors (Greenbaum, Yun, & Todres, 2018). The author explained that, children have little knowledge on sexual abuse dynamics and disclosure and could therefore not comprehend the investigators’ questions appropriately. Thus, the young ones could end up giving information that could be significantly challenged in the court of law.

Another problem that investigators could encounter while interviewing a victim of child exploitation is distorted presentation of information. Peixoto, Fernandes, Almeida, Silva, La Rooy, Ribeiro…, Magalhães (2017) argued that, most victims of child exploitation are extremely traumatized and thus it could be challenging to them to narrate clearly the events that occurred during the exploitation. Apparently, some of the incidences that the child exploitation children undergo fracture their ability to express themselves. Remembering them could be more painful and thereby obscuring their ability to recount properly the issues that occurred. Greenbaum et al. (2018) expressed their fears that, trauma deeply affects people’s ability to recall what happened. According to his excerpt, young children have less developed cognitive capacity and therefore giving reliable information is hampered. Considering these views, it is clear that, investigators might not get reliable information that could prove their cases beyond reasonable doubt.

Besides, victims of child exploitation fear providing information that could criminalize them against the country laws. According to the U.S. Department of State (2017), the minors are usually brainwashed by their tormenters thereby discouraging them from sharing information. According to the Department’s report on Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2017, the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, Susan Coppedge provided vivid illustration on the impact of fear among victims of child exploitation. She said that her experience as federal prosecutor taught her that the minor victims fear investigators as they consider them part of a system that would punish them instead of convicting and incarcerating the offenders. Based on this statement, it is apparent that the child exploitation-victims fear not only sharing information due to being brainwashed but also the justice system, including the investigators.

Culture has profound effect on the type of information that people could share freely without the fear of reprisal. In this regard, culture affects the amount of information that such victims could provide to the investigators. Peixoto et al. (2017) posited that, the young ones are usually brought up in a society closely knit by cultural norms and beliefs; it is considered an abomination to some talk about some subjects or rather topics including sexual exploitation in some communities. In this case, the investigators find it problematic to gather information from the victims of child exploitation due to their cultural backgrounds. On a different note, some cultures stigmatize the victims. As Greenbaum et al. (2018) postulated, some of the minors involved in child exploitation fear being stigmatized and therefore could be unwilling to testify against their considered sexual exploiters.

CMRJ518 Theoretical Approaches to Explaining Deviant Behavior

1.  After reading the required articles this week and doing your own research what theoretical perspective(s) do you most align with to help explain deviant behavior?

Criminologists have explored varying theoretical perspectives that underpin deviant behavior. Considerably some provide precise highlights on personal experiences or observations that illustrate deviance in the society. One of the imperative theories is the differential association model formulated by Edwin Sutherland. According to this theoretical underpinning, deviate behavior develops out of people’s interaction with their peers or other people in the society (Bullock, Deater-Deckard, & Leve, 2006). Based on this observation, it is apparent that people learn the attitudes, motives, techniques, and values for criminal behavior by association with individuals involved in criminal activities. Being a positivist theory, it shows that persons focus not to the subjective position of different social impressions but to specific acts. The individuals learn rationalizations and drive to commit crime (Hauhart, 2013); the cultural transmission and construction processes inspire them. Thus, persons define their lives in reference to their personal experiences after which they generalize the ensuing definitions to guide their decisions on the actions to take.

Differential association is grounded on the belief that people would make criminal decisions depending on the influence of others to their lives. According to Bullock (2006), the individuals would be interested in deviance if the balance law-abiding definitions were less that of law-breaking people. The tendency to defy the law would be reinforced if the social association between them provides criminally active people in their lives. Incidentally, the higher the status of the influencers in the society, the higher the chances that those associating with them to develop deviance behavior. Therefore, people are highly likely to follow others if the influencers are highly ranked in the society, their criminal behavior notwithstanding. Hauhart (2013) expounds that the people are inspired by the need to amass social gain or money. However, it is imperative to note that without the interaction with others such people would rarely engage in criminal behavior. The interactions make it easier for them to commit crime because they learn applicable techniques and drives.

Another theoretical perspective in developing deviant behavior is the labelling theory. Bernburg, Krohn, and Rivera (2006) argued that labelling theory predicts that stigmatizing people on criminal status might increase the likelihood t that they would get interested in deviant social networks. As the authors explained, it is easier for teenagers stereotyped as criminals to join deviant social groups such as delinquent peers and street gangs within their vicinity. Based on this view, the young ones sense of belonging drives them to become involved in the gangs after being referenced as part of them.

While the youth might not be earlier interested in the deviant behavior, labelling them reinforces the attraction to develop interest. Their behavior and self-identity are shaped or determined by the terms used to classify their image (Bernburg et al., 2006). Negative social terms influence the person’s social identity and self-concept. In this case, the individuals view themselves as described by the labels thereby inspiring them to associate with people already doing activities associated with the terms. For instance, if a young African American boy grows up being labelled a drug peddler, it is possible that he would join gangs operating drug trafficking businesses in the streets. Stereotyping is the main factor that drives the young one into developing deviance and thus criminal involvement.

2. Can deviance be positive? Explain.

Truly, deviance can be positive. Positive deviance ascribes to the fact that in a society there could be people whose uncommon practices lead them to being more successful or finding solutions to particular issues affecting the society (Gardner, Dishon, & Connell, 2008). This perspective shows that people that follow the path of positive deviance go against the norms in the society. For instance, during the racial discrimination period in the United States and subsequent civil unrest, some of the events could be described as positive deviance. For instance, Rosa Parks seated in front of the bus against the societal norms. According to this example, Parks challenged the then social norms an aspect that culminated to a positive change in the society as the Blacks assumed equal status as the whites.

Although positive deviance could be messy, time consuming, and challenging as the society adopts the ensuing change, it is beneficial to the people. Gardner, Dishon, and Connell (2008) explored self-regulation among adolescents as a way of expressing positive deviance. According to the authors, self-regulation led to resilience among the teenagers an aspect that allowed them to resist antisocial behavior practiced by their deviant peers. While resisting societal boundaries could be a bad practice among the teenagers those who defy end up being castigated as outsiders. However, going against the negative influences promotes their ability to associate and earn acceptance within the larger society. In a broad sense, defying the negative influences from their peers shows positive deviance against what many of them could be considering as the rightful way to protest against set societal practices.

CMRJ527

Discuss the link that sadism has with serial murder. Is there research evidence to support that most serial murders are sadists, if so, cite it? Do you think sadism is treatable?

Like other complex human actions, serial killing is grounded on a skein of interacting and interrelated processes: social, psychological, and biological processes. However, sadistic personality disorder (SPD) has been identified as key disorder among serial killers. According to Krueger (2010), SPD is implicated in violence as aspect used by serial murderers in eliminating their victims. Sadism provides the killers with the motive to murder as they seek to dominate and at the same time humiliate their victims. The serial murders are interested in controlling their victims; their desire is to overrule their free will with a view of degrading them. Fedoroff (2008) submitted that serial killers experienced paraphilic arousal while degrading and controlling other people. In this case, they derive satisfaction in hurting others and seeing them suffer relentlessly until they die.

Studies indicate that there is a strong association between negative brain activation and serial killing. The amygdala, a brain area concerned with the expression of strong emotions is greatly activated among serial killers (Fedoroff, 2008). Apparently, normalcy indicates that humans harbor empathy towards the others. However, serial killers are bereft of this important value. As Krueger (2010) opined, serial killers lack shallow affect, callousness, and empathy. The author explained that these attributes are significantly imperative among people because they act as obstructions against demeaning and cruel behavior.

Sadism is manifested in the serial killers ability to plan and execute the murders through calculative means. Incidentally, serial murders are well planned; they take place in preselected locations, and involve painful acts including sexual encounters, intentional torture, stabbing or strangulation (Fedoroff, 2008). The scholar exclaimed that, it is no surprise that serial murders seek unsuspecting bondage with their victims before killing them. However, the author noted that, the time taken in bonding is designed to lure the victim to the designated murder location or create trust between the victim and the criminal.

The debate that sadism could be treated has attracted broad debate. Interestingly, sadism was initially considered a mental disorder; however, recent studies indicate that it is a personality trait and could be treated. According to Krueger, (2010), sadism especially sexual sadism could be treated through medication and psychotherapy. The author suggested that cognitive-behavioral therapy could assist the sexual sadists in recognizing patterns that arouse their sexual desire thereby being able to learn healthier responses to the stimulus. In this case, therapists help the affected individuals to discover the cause of their paraphilic behavior and teach them skills to manage their excessive, harmful sexual urges. The therapeutic process may include using aversion therapy as well as varying desensitization or images that allows the sexual sadists to view them in the experience and situation of their victims (Centore, 2008). Moreover, cognitive restructuring and empathy training could be used. The cognitive restructuring involves the identification and change of person’s thoughts that influence their extreme sexual behavior.

On a different note, medications could play a major role in treating sexual sadism and thereby reduce the prevalence of serial killing in the society. This aspect involves using antidepressant drugs to reduce the person’s sexual desire; furthermore, medications could be used to decrease the amount of testosterone circulating in the people’s body to minimize the frequency of sexual erections or fantasies (Marshall, W., Marshall, L., Serran, & Fernandez, 2013). Thus, sadism could be treated.

CMRJ531 Scientific and Technological Approaches

1. If profilers are able to identify specific traits and/or characteristics of mass murders, how could criminal justice utilize these predictors to prevent future incidents?

Mass murders are complex since they involve the killing of multiple people at the same place. Holmes R. and Holmes S. (1992) said that some authorities consider four people as the minimum number of individuals involved in mass murder. They reiterated that mass murder entails the killing of five or more people in which three of them are murdered by the same killer in a single episode.  The gravity of the life loss illustrates that there is need to focus on applicable ways to prevent mass murder incidences in the society.

Crime prevention is an important aspect in the modern-day society characterized by rising mass murders. Profiling of mass murderers has further provided an integral step towards minimizing future incidents. The criminal justice could use the predictors emanating from the profiling to prevent further murder incidents. One of the ways such predictors could be used is by the justice system is through creating public awareness. Coincidentally, most of the mass murderers bear similar characteristics; moreover, they live and interact with other people in the society on a daily basis (Turvey, 2011). In this case, their presence in the general society offers an opportunity for them to be identified and reported before they commit their heinous acts. However, the public should be aware of the way such people behave prior to the crime. Therefore, the criminal justice could organize public campaign programs to ensure the citizens learn about the behavior of mass murders while living in the society.

Motivation is a crucial link in mass murders. As Holmes R. and Holmes S. (1992) explained, both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation could drive people to commit mass murder. However, it is highly challenging to identify a mass murderer when the motivation resides outside the person, the thing that commands them to kill. In this case, the justice system should pay more attention to not only the mass murderers but also the people who could harbor a behavior that suggests social abnormally. These include people living in seclusion but associating with specific individuals only over time. This behavior could point to an upcoming mass murder incidence. In light of this, aspect, the justice system should use the predictors by requesting public reports on people living isolated lives or interacting with certain individuals only while avoiding others in the society.

Family annihilator is an instrumental subject in mass killing. It encompasses a person killing an entire family at once, sometimes, including the family pet (Holmes R., & Holmes S., 1992). Justice system could monitor people who express dissatisfaction with a certain family. However, this matter could be possible if the targeted family reports the issue to the authorities. Based on this view, the justice system could encourage families to report any incidences of threats that could be issued against them by other people. This information could thus be shared among the local police to ensure the threatening individuals are continuously monitored to avert mass killing incident. The same case applies to youthful familicidal offenders. Vinas-Rocionero, Schlesinger, Scalora, and Jarvis (2017) observed that some mass murders involve youths who annihilate their family members. In such incidences, the justice system should encourage to consider referring their youthful children to regular sessions with their school counselling departments perhaps to detect any signs of discontentment among the teenagers.

References

American Bar Association (2018). Understanding sexual grooming in child abuse cases. Retrieved December 11, 2018 from https://www.americanbar.org/groups/child_law/resources/child_law_practiceonline/child_law_practice/vol-34/november-2015/understanding-sexual-grooming-in-child-abuse-cases/

Bullock B., Deater-Deckard, K., & Leve, L. (2006). Deviant peer affiliation and problem behavior: A test of genetic and environmental influence, Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34(1), 29.

Centore, A. (2008). Sadism and masochism: sexual sadomasochism, facts and diagnosis, counseling treatments. Boston Counseling Therapy. Retrieved from http://www.thriveboston.com/counseling/sadism-and-masochism-sexual-sadomasochism-facts-and-diagnosis-counseling-treatments/

Fedoroff, J.P. (2008). Sadism, sadomasochism, sex, and violence. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 53(10), 637-646.

Gardner, T., Dishion, T., & Connell, A. (2008). Adolescent self-regulation as resilience: Resistance to antisocial behavior within the deviant peer context. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36, 273.

Greenbaum, V. J., Yun, K., & Todres, J. (2018). Child trafficking: Issues for policy and practice. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, (Issue 1), 159. Retrieved from http://165.193.178.96/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedshol%26AN%3dedshol.hein.journals.medeth46.17%26site%3deds-live

Gunnar, J., Krohn, M., & Rivera, C.J. (2006). Official labeling, criminal Embeddedness, and subsequent delinquency: A longitudinal test of labeling theory. Journal of Research of Crime and Delinquency, 63, 67.

Holmes, R.M., & Holmes, S.T. (1992).  Understanding mass murder: A starting point.  Federal Probation, 56(1), 53. Https: //www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/136809NCJRS.pdf. (In support of CO3, CO4)

Hauhart Robert. (2013). Differential Association Theory. Encyclopedia of White-Collar & Corporate Crime. Retrieved from http://165.193.178.96/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedscrc%26AN%3dedscrc.14168942%26site%3deds-live

Kettleborough, D. G., & Merdian, H. L. (2017). Gateway to offending behavior: permission-giving thoughts of online users of child sexual exploitation material. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 23(1), 19. Retrieved from http://165.193.178.96/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedb%26AN%3d121123334%26site%3deds-live

Krueger, R.B. (2010). The DSM diagnostic criteria for sexual sadism. Archives of Sexual Behavior 39, 325-345. DOI: 10.1007/s10508-009-9586-3

Marshall, W. L., Marshall, L. E., Serran, G. A., & Fernandez, Y. M. (2013). Treating sexual offenders: An integrated approach. Abingdon: Routledge.

Peixoto, C. E., Fernandes, R. V., Almeida, T. S., Silva, J. M., La Rooy, D., Ribeiro, C., … Magalhães, T. (2017). Interviews of children in a Portuguese special judicial procedure. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 35(3), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2284

Turvey, B. (2011). Criminal profiling: an introduction to behavioral evidence analysis.   Chapter 4, 5 and 6. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu. (In support of CO1, CO2)

U.S. Department of State. (2017, June). Trafficking in persons report –

                  2017. Retrieved December 11, 2018 from

                  https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/271339.pdf

                  Pages 25-56

Viñas-Racionero, R., Schlesinger, L., Scalora, M., & Jarvis, J. (2017). Youthful familicidal offenders: targeted victims, planned attacks. Journal of Family Violence, 32(5), 535–542. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-016-9836-9.

Williams, A. (2015). Child sexual victimization: ethnographic stories of stranger and acquaintance grooming. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 21(1), 28. Retrieved from http://165.193.178.96/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedb%26AN%3d100577699%26site%3deds-live

Winters, G. M., Kaylor, L. E., & Jeglic, E. L. (2017). Sexual offenders contacting children online: an examination of transcripts of sexual grooming. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 23(1), 62. Retrieved from http://165.193.178.96/login?url=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ebscohost.com%2flogin.aspx%3fdirect%3dtrue%26db%3dedb%26AN%3d121123339%26site%3deds-live.