Thank you.
By way of introduction, my name is Catherine Dawson, and I've been engaged in the training of police officers and have worked in the field of criminology for over a decade. My research field is offences committed over the Internet, particularly those involving children. I am a member of the Canadian Police Sector Council and the Society for the Policing of Cyberspace, and I am a research associate with the University of the Fraser Valley. I also sit on the advocacy committee of the Canadian Federation of University Women, and I volunteer at the Abbotsford Police Department as a victims service worker. So I thank you very much for inviting me here today.
I would like to start with some facts. In 2010 I completed a pan-Canadian research project that examined the exponential increase of crimes of exploitation committed on or facilitated by the Internet against children in Canada and globally. Accessing images of child abuse--somewhat understated by the use of the term “child pornography”--child luring, trafficking, and travelling for the purpose of sexual offending are crimes increasingly facilitated by modern, ubiquitous technologies, especially the Internet, around the globe. In part, my research concluded that Canadian criminal law and the sentencing guidelines that follow have not advanced sufficiently to address the investigation, the prevention, and the impact of these crimes or to deal with the offenders who commit them. At the conclusion of that study, I made a number of recommendations related to changing both policy and practice, and I shall do so again today.
The crime: It has been found that approximately five million images of child abuse are in circulation on the Internet, featuring some 400,000 children. Cybertip Canada research indicates that nearly sixty percent of those images that they examine are of children under the age of eight and nearly ten percent are babies and toddlers. Many of these images, which I have seen, reflect torture and bondage. As just one recent example of the scope of the problem, a man arrested in British Columbia last month was found to have upwards of one million sexually explicit images of children on a broad variety of communications devices, including his computer.
How do offenders use the Internet? My research indicates that there are four main ways in which offenders use the Internet to exploit and abuse children. First, they traffic--distribute--images and videos of sexual abuse also known as child pornography. Second, they locate children for the purpose of sexual abuse, to plan their foreign travel, to sexually offend. This is known collectively as “sex tourism”. Or they lure children to real meetings closer to home. Third, they engage in inappropriate sexual communication with children, including what occurs on social networking sites. And fourth, they communicate with like-minded individuals.
Evidence shows that offenders join like-minded individuals in their online communities in an attempt to normalize their behaviour and of course to gain access to the collections of others. They also learn new methods, such as encryption, to avoid detection.
Controversial but thought-provoking research conducted by Rodriguez indicated that a high percentage of viewers of child pornography are or will become contact offenders. Other researchers argue that at least 80% of those who purchase child pornography are contact offenders and child molesters. And much research claims that viewing any pornography can become addictive.
I believe offenders acting in cyber communities of pedophiles must be removed from the immediate and somewhat anonymous gratification that high-speed access and peer-to-peer transfer of files provides. To prevent the ever-increasing numbers of crime, offenders must be disconnected from social networking sites through which they lurk and stalk.
Canadian research finds that three-quarters of a million pedophiles are online at any given time, and evidence shows that sexual offenders often have multiple victims. Those offenders who view images of child abuse often have thousands of images in their collections that date back years and originate from many sources.
In addition to the initial sexual assault, whenever a violent crime is recorded or shown through webcam or video streaming, each time that image is downloaded or viewed, another crime is committed and the victim is exploited again and is re-victimized.
These are my comments on sentencing. Sentences should reflect a reasoned, informed approach that includes respect for the victim, appreciation for the gravity of the impact of the crime, and a recognition of our ever-changing technological and social landscape. Minimum sentencing, as it stands today in Canada, does not achieve this goal. I would argue it does not consider the real and often lifelong impact that offences have on the victims.
Data shows that contact sexual offenders, those who use the Internet to produce images and video, are most often not strangers. The impact on children raised in a home where they have been sexually attacked and exploited is an understudied phenomenon. But Ethel Quayle, one of the world's pre-eminent researchers in the field, states that the process of producing child pornography is a learning instrument in the grooming process whereby a child is de-sensitized to sexual demands and is encouraged to normalize inappropriate activities.
Health Canada has identified over a dozen observable effects of child abuse, including unusually high levels of anger and aggression. These effects have long-ranging implications for the children, their families, and their communities.
Sentence guidelines must integrate realistic societal standards. With the current minimum guidelines, criminals who have committed child pornography offences thousands of times may in fact receive a minimum sentence of 14 days. At present, the minimum sentence guidelines for the sexual touching of a child under 14 are the same. This sentence, in my opinion, serves no realistic intent or purpose, and I would argue that no reasonable person in Canada would think this is an acceptable penalty for the possession and viewing of images of sexual crimes committed against children.
Minimum sentences at present also fail to provide a modicum of rehabilitative potential. Indeed, sentences should offer some reasonable chance for offender change. The statistical data of convicted persons with addictions or addictive personalities is well documented elsewhere. Minimum sentences provide no time for recovery or cognitive treatment. Longer sentences could mean longer community-based programming and denying access to computers and the Internet as a condition of parole or probation.
In British Columbia today, with a minimum sentence of 18 months, day parole could be available under many conditions at three months and full parole at six, but the remainder of the sentence would be served in the community under supervision until warrant expiry. This, I believe, would be a more effective way in which to exercise better supervision and programming options.
This brings me to my recommendations. My recommendations are in support of the new minimum sentence guidelines and they are rooted in the belief that the new guidelines will better serve victims, offenders, and the public.
Victim recognition and respect are enhanced by longer sentences and greater penalties. In fact, Canadian research is being conducted now on child pornography victim impacts. It's being conducted in Canada, and that research should be out soon.
The offender's potential for rehabilitation is increased by serving longer sentences requiring abstention as a condition of parole or probation. A community, be it the real one or the cyber world, where children learn and play is made safer when offenders are denied access.
I believe public confidence in the justice system is greatly enriched when the Criminal Code and the sentence guidelines reflect the reality of today's world.
Thank you.