01.30.08
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 18:32 by Administrator
Police seek to learn the identities of other victims
Michael Hall Gallagher, w/m, age 39
5 feet 11 inches, 180 pounds
brown hair, hazel eyes
Date/Time: 01/25/08, 1050 hours
Search/Arrest location: 7841 N. 59th. Lane, Glendale, AZ
Charges & Bond
Sexual exploitation of a minor – child pornography – (1 count)
Sexual conduct with a minor – (1 count)
Sex abuse – (1 count)
Gallagher is being held without bond
Agencies: Phoenix Police Department / Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, FBI, ICE.
Details
After a two-month investigation into Internet-trafficked contraband images of child pornography, Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force detectives from the Phoenix Police Department arrested Michael Gallagher, a divorced, 39 year old shipping clerk for sexual exploitation of a minor (child pornography).
Gallagher made admissions regarding physical contact offenses including sexual conduct with minors and sex abuse. One of Gallaghers victims was identified. The victims’ name is being withheld.
Assisting in the investigation were special agents from the FBI, ICE, and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. The case will be submitted to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for prosecution.
Investigators have not yet identified all of Gallaghers victims.
Police are requesting that anyone with information about unlawful activities involving Gallagher contact Detective Jerry Barker Phoenix Police Crimes against Children Unit at 602-495-0681 or contact the Arizona ICAC Task force at
http://azicac.org/modules/contact/Phoenix Police Report number: 2008-80135629
Permalink
01.12.08
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 15:37 by Administrator
By Monica Balderrama-KFOX News Reporter. 01/11/08
EL PASO, Texas – An El Paso man who allegedly saw a young boy viewing porn at a public library said he’s more shocked at the library’s policy on that issue.
As KFOX reported, the library cannot stop people from using certain Web sites because of privacy laws. In this case, the child viewing porn had permission from his parents.
When Junior Varela took his little brother and nephew to the library to research a science project, he never expected to catch another young boy viewing what he called a pornographic Web site.
“There was a kid, 9 to 10 years old next to him, viewing porn. I didn’t know if that’s what he was looking at. So I looked at it again,” said Varela.
When he became sure of what he saw he approached a library clerk to let him know what was going on. But to his surprise, the library staff said the young boy was within his rights.
“They can allow anyone who is in the computer to view whatever they want so that’s why their parents fill out the paperwork so they can be aware that they are on the Internet,” said Varela.
We called library officials and they released this statement:
“The current long-standing Library policy is to allow parents full responsibility for what their children access over the Internet. Before any minor can have access to the Internet, a parent must come into the Library, read and acknowledge to have read an Internet permission form, which specifically addresses potentially harmful material online, then sign the form.”
Junior said when he realized the library staff wasn’t going to do anything about it, he and his brother and nephew left the building without finishing their project. He’s not sure if he’ll go back.
“I don’t want to bring him anymore, my little brother or my nephew. Until this gets straighten out or something gets done I’m going to have to find somewhere else to take them to use a computer,” said Valera.
As we’ve reported, the library is currently installing a new system that will give parents the option to allow only filtered Internet sessions for their children.
The system is currently available at two locations, the main library downtown and the Richard Burgess Branch but will be implemented system-wide. Library officials say when the system is in place, all Internet sessions for minors will be filtered unless a parent says otherwise.
Retrieved January 12, 2008 from http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/15033763/detail.html
Permalink
01.10.08
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 15:39 by Administrator
Dr. Frank Kardasz – revised October 20, 2007
Unlawful images of crimes against children
Images depicting the sexual exploitation of minors are serious crimes. Misguided apologists for child pornographers marginalize innocent children by attempting to rationalize child pornography with the explanation; “it’s only a picture.” When a child’s innocence is stolen by a preferential offender who derives gratification from memorializing a sexual assault, it is more than “just a picture.” Those who trade and traffic such images tacitly encourage and facilitate such unlawful activity. Some argue that each time the picture is viewed, the child depicted is re-victimized.
In March 2003, Morton Berger, of Phoenix, Arizona was convicted of possessing 20 images depicting the sexual exploitation of minors. The Arizona mandatory minimum sentence for his crimes was 200 years in prison. At sentencing his supporters argued that the sentence was too harsh for someone who only possessed and looked at pictures.
Why are the images crimes? Beyond self-gratification, child pornographers use the unlawful images for other reasons including (Child pornography, 1986):
1. To blackmail children into keeping silent about the abuse.
2. To preserve a child’s youthful image at the age preferred by the pedophile.
3. To establish trust and camaraderie with other pedophiles.
4. To gain access to other markets and children by exchanging material with other pedophiles.
5. To duplicate, produce and sell for profit.
6. To reassure themselves that their deviant behavior is shared by others and therefore not abnormal.
7. To seduce children and lower the child’s inhibitions as part of the grooming process intended to modeldeviant sexual behavior.
Danger?
Are the possessors of child pornography dangerous? Is someone who looks at pictures truly a threat to offend against a child? Recent research (Hernandez, 2006) suggests that there may be a correlation between those who possess child pornography and those who are also “hands-on” contact offenders. One study of federal prisoners indicated that 85% of those in custody for possession of child pornography were also “hands-on” offenders whose contact offenses had never been discovered. Other professional concur with the opinion that there may be a danger of possessors of child pornography eventually offending against a real child.
Dr. Chris Hatcher, (1997) Professor of Psychology at the University of California said, “It begins with fantasy, moves to gratification through pornography, then voyeurism, and finally, to contact.” Former FBI profiler John Douglas (Mindhunter, 1995, p. 108) described the relationship between pornographic images and sex offenders. He said, “With most sexually based killers, it is a several-step escalation from the fantasy to the reality, often fueled by pornography, morbid experimentation on animals, and cruelty to peers.”
The Victims
What about the effect of child pornography on the victims? Are there any lingering problems for children who are the subject of abuse? Researchers found that the effects of child pornography on child victims is often devastating. According to Klain, Davies and Hicks (Child pornography, March 2001, p.10) child sex abuse victims suffer a multitude of physical and psychological problems.
A Case Study
In 2003, former Arizona high school teacher Morton Berger was convicted on 20 counts of possession of child pornography and sentenced to 200 years prison. He appealed the sentence based on arguments of equal protection under the law and cruel and unusual punishment. In December 2004, the conviction was affirmed by two of the three judges of the Arizona Court of Appeals (State of Arizona, 2004, December 14). Judges Susan Ehrlich and Philip Hall dismissed Berger’s appeal with well-reasoned and researched arguments including (citations omitted):
1. It is evident beyond the need for elaboration that a State’s interest in safeguarding the physical andpsychological well-being of a minor is compelling.
2. …the victimization of a child continues when that act is memorialized in an image. The materialsproduced are a permanent record of the children’s participation and the harm to the child is exacerbatedby their circulation. Unfortunately, the victimization of the children involved does not end when thepornographer’s camera is put away.
3. The legislative judgment…is that the use of children as subjects of pornographic materials is harmful tothe physiological, emotional, and mental health of the child.
4. …the possession of child pornography drives that industry and…the production of child pornography willdecrease if those who possess the product are punished equally with those who produce it.
5. …it (the law) will decrease the production of child pornography if it penalizes those who possess andview the product, thereby decreasing demand.
6. …the possession of child pornography inflames the desires of child molesters, pedophiles and childpornographers. The State has more than a passing interest in forestalling the damage caused by childpornography: preventing harm to children is, without cavil, one of its most important interests.
7. …we cannot fault the State for attempting to stamp out this vice at all levels in the distribution chain.
8. Berger downloaded images from the Internet, and every time he visited a website, he demonstrated to theproducers and sellers of child pornography that there was a demand for their product. Berger’s demandserved to drive the industry; there need not have been a direct monetary exchange. Berger maintains also that, because his possession of the pornographic images was passive and because he did not usethreats or violence in the commission of his crimes, his sentence is grossly disproportionate. This logic isabstruse. As was described by this court in Hazlett, 205 Ariz. at 527 p 11, 73 P. 3d at 1262, and as isevident from the violent pornographic images in this case, child pornography is a form of child abuse. Thematerials produced are a permanent record of the children’s participation and the harm to the child isexacerbated by their circulation.
The U.S. Supreme court turned down Morton Bergers next request for an appeal. His 200 year prison sentence was upheld. Berger is scheduled for release from the Arizona Department of Corrections in 2157.
Conclusion
The innocent victims of child pornography sometimes suffer a lifetime of psychological anguish and torment wondering when where and how their tortured images will surface. Those who traffic in, possess and derive gratification from child pornography perpetuate the anguish. The typical child pornographer possessor arrested by the Arizona ICAC Task Force has dozens and often hundreds of unlawful images and videos.
Many people argue that each image tacitly re-victimizes the child whenever the image is viewed. Many victims of child pornography will never disclose their victimization to anyone. They suffer in silent, haunted purgatory. As adults, most victims do not wish to relive past abuse. Determining the scope of the Internet child pornography is difficult to do. It can safely be said that the problem is increasing at a disturbing rate. Efforts to eradicate images that depict the sexual exploitation of minors must continue and offenders must be brought to justice.
References
Child pornography and pedophilia: Report made by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of theCommittee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate. (1986). 99th Congress, Second session.Washington: U.S. G.P.O.1986. iii. 54: 24 cm.
Douglas, J. and Olshaker, M. (1995). Mindhunter: Inside the FBI’s elite serial crime unit, New York: PocketBooks.
Hatcher, C. (1997, October). Cited in: Armagh, D. A. Safety net for the Internet: Protecting our children.Juvenile Justice Journal (on-line) Volume V, Number 1, May 1998. Retrieved March 15, 2003. from http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/jjjournal/jjjournal598/net.html
Hernandez, A. E. (2006, September 26). Statement of Andres E. Hernandez before the Subcommittee onOversight and Investigations, Committee on Energy and Commerce. U.S.
House of Representatives.Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://www.projectsafechildhood.gov/HernandezTestimonyCongress.pdf
Klain, E.J., Davies, H.J., & Hicks, M.A., (2001, March). Child Pornography: The criminal justice systemresponse, American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law for the National Center for Missingand Exploited Children. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/publications/NC81.pdf
State of Arizona Division One Court of Appeals. (2004, December 14). Appeal from the Superior Court inMaricopa County. 1 CA-CR 03-0243. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from http://www.cofad1.state.az.us//opinionfiles/CR/CR030243.pdf
Permalink
01.02.08
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 02:38 by Administrator
Sunday school teacher accused of molesting child
Sarah Muench, The Arizona Republic, 12/31/07
Police have arrested a Chandler Sunday school teacher on suspicion of molesting a 5-year-old girl while at the church, reports show.
Police say Terry Greenwood, 62, a Chandler United Methodist Church Sunday school teacher, told them that he molested the girl and made her perform oral sex, police reports show.
Greenwood is being held without bond in Maricopa County Jail.
The girl’s mother heard her daughter talking about the sexual acts, she said in a police report.
During a police interview, the girl detailed the contact she said she had with Greenwood and said the incidents happened more than once at the church, reports show.
In a police-recorded phone interview with the victim’s mother, Greenwood admitted exposing himself to her daughter twice, and said he made a mistake and he was ashamed of it, reports show.
Greenwood told her he blamed his actions on medication he was taking for high blood pressure, that he has erectile dysfunction and mental problems, the police report shows.
On Dec. 21, police arrested Greenwood, also an employee at a Chandler Paradise Bakery, on suspicion of child molestation, sexual conduct with a minor and indecent exposure.
Greenwood admitted to touching the girl inappropriately on Dec. 9, then oral sex and exposing himself on Dec. 12 in an empty classroom and then in an art room.
Greenwood told police “he knew he could take advantage of her because of her age, she trusted him and she would not tell because she was always so quiet,” Chandler Detective John Beekman wrote in the report. “Terry admitted that since he felt he got away with it that first Sunday, it emboldened him to do it again the following Sunday.”
Before the alleged molestation, he told police he also tried to touch other girls in December in the class. Greenwood tried to put his hand under their dresses and they pushed his hand away, he told police.
According to a police interview, Greenwood said that months earlier he also tried to inappropriately touch friends of his 11-year-old daughter.
Greenwood, a married father of two, said he was ashamed of what he has done, the report said, but became curious after viewing child pornography and then felt “titillated and sexually aroused” when touching or trying to touch the young girls.
“Terry eventually admitted that he knew it would be easier to get this feeling with a young child he could take advantage of and that trusted him, than trying to find an adult woman or woman near his age,” Beekman wrote.
At least one other victim has come forward, according to the report.
Church officials sent out information to their parishioners about Greenwood, prompting another victim to call police with another possible case against Greenwood, the police report shows.
Detectives are investigating the case, said Detective David Ramer, a Chandler police spokesman.
Retrieved January 1, 2008 from http://www.azcentral.com/community/chandler/articles/1231cr-molest0101.html
Permalink
Police seek to learn the identities of other victims