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.