02.29.08
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 22:46 by Administrator
Dr. Kardasz – The sad situation reported below by ABC News was the predictable outcome of some over-zealous work.
For more information about cybervigilantes see: http://kardasz.org/Cybervigilantes.html
—————————————————-
From ABC News on-line: Judge OKs Trial in Dateline ‘Predator’ Suicide Case
Lawsuit Blames NBC for the Suicide of a Texas Prosecutor Targeted in an Undercover Sting Against Alleged Pedophiles
By Brian Ross and Vic Walter Feb. 27, 2008
In a stinging rebuke to the NBC News “Predator” series, a federal judge has given the go-ahead for a lawsuit blaming the network for the suicide of a Texas prosecutor who was targeted in an undercover sting against alleged pedophiles.
U.S. District Judge Denny Chin ruled that “a reasonable jury could find that NBC crossed the line from responsible journalism to irresponsible and reckless intrusion into law enforcement.”
The suit was brought by the sister of William Conradt Jr., an assistant district attorney in Rockland County, Texas, who shot himself in the head after a local police SWAT team, accompanied by a “Dateline” crew, surrounded his house and moved in to arrest him in November 2006.
Judge Chin dismissed claims of racketeering, negligence and unjust enrichment against NBC but said allegations of intentional infliction of emotional distress and certain civil rights violations could go to trial.
The judge said he concluded there were sufficient facts in the allegations to “render plausible” the suicide was foreseeable and that “the police officers and NBC acted with deliberate indifference and in a manner that would shock one’s conscience.”
“This decision shows law enforcement should never subcontract their uniform, badge and the oath they take,” Bruce Baron, the attorney representing Conradt’s sister Patricia in the lawsuit against NBC Universal, Inc., said. “Patricia looks forward to protecting the constitutional rights that were trampled upon on that very dreadful day.”
Conradt’s suicide was at the center of an ABC News “20/20″ investigation looking into troubling questions for both law enforcement and the news media raised by the popular “Dateline” series.
When Conradt did not take the bait to go to the sting house set up by Dateline and Perverted Justice, a civilian watchdog group hired as a paid consultant by NBC, the decision was made to go get him at his home in Terrell, Texas.
Conradt’s sister Patricia told “20/20″ the police broke in and then headed down a hallway to the bedroom where her brother was waiting for them with a gun in his hand.
“They came in, and they see him,” Patricia said. “He says, ‘Guys, I’m not gonna hurt anybody.’ And then he put the gun to his head and shot.”
William Conradt died shortly after a helicopter called in landed at a Dallas hospital.
Walter Weiss, a former detective with the police department that partnered with Dateline, and who has since left the force in disgust, told “20/20,” “I understand he took his own life, but I have a feeling that he took his own life when he looked out the door and saw there was a bunch of television cameras outside.”
NBC and the Murphy police, who had partnered with the series, deny NBC played any role in the decision to make the arrest, which involved a swat team breaking down the prosecutor’s door when he did not answer.
And in a response following the “20/20″ broadcast, NBC called the ABC News investigation “seriously flawed.”
“We think evidence will ultimately show that ‘Dateline’ acted responsibly and lawfully, and we will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, ” NBC News said today in a statement responding to Judge Chin’s ruling.
Retrieved February 29, 2008 from http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4353781&page=1
Permalink
02.13.08
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 20:08 by Administrator
Dr. Frank Kardasz, updated February 12, 2008
Introduction
I am conducting ongoing research into a contentious issue. The issue involves whether or not Internet service providers (ISP)’s should be mandated to retain basic data about their subscribers and subsequently report that information quickly to law enforcement upon receipt of legal process in the form of a subpoena or search warrant.
Contentious Issue
The issue is contentious because law enforcement investigators around the world must rely on ISP’s to provide the most basic information about their subscribers so that law enforcement can pinpoint the location of cyber-offenders. Delays in reporting information and the lack of information can stall or extinguish an investigation. Particularly in the cases involving sexual exploitation, young lives are sometimes at stake while investigators wait for responses from ISP’s.
Privacy advocates sometimes argue that requiring ISP’s to retain basic subscriber data is an invasion of privacy and involves government “snooping”. Internet service providers themselves may be reluctant to retain and report information to law enforcement because of the additional time, equipment and resources required to preserve and report data.
Subscriber Data
Most Internet service providers already collect and retain subscriber data. Subscriber data is the most basic user information and usually includes the name, address and billing information of the person responsible for paying for Internet service. Most ISP’s collect and retain subscriber data at least long enough to charge subscribers for their Internet service. ISP’s are not required by law to retain data. Some ISP’s quickly discard data when the data is no longer needed.
Survey Data
In July 2007 I began conducting surveys of investigators by sending e-mails to my colleagues nationwide asking them for anecdotal stories involving recent problems with ISP’s. The stories are compelling. Here are some of the replies:
1. In November 2006 an Arizona homicide investigator sent preservation letters to Yahoo and MSN and followed up with a search warrant for the content of e-mails from both the homicide victim and the murder suspect. As of July 2007, eight months later, the investigator had not received the information requested from either Yahoo or MSN.
2. In April 2007 a Nebraska Internet crimes against children investigator served a subpoena to Hamilton.net, an Aurora, Nebraska based ISP, for the purpose of obtaining subscriber information. Although the company had responded to previous subpoenas, on this occasion they stated that they did not think a subpoena was legal. Investigators subsequently obtained an opinion from the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office favoring the legality of the subpoena. The ISP responded on June 20, 2007, however, they had not retained all of the requested data. Investigators subsequently learned that the suspect had created child pornography involving his own daughter and had molested several child victims. (Note: Investigators often anguish over the possibility that while they await the response to one of their subpoenas, a child somewhere continues to be victimized because detectives do not know the location of the ongoing offense.)
3. In July 2007 a Colorado Internet crimes against children investigator reported that Denver Public Libraries destroy data after each patron logs off of the libraries computers. Investigators are unable to obtain any information about library computer users. In the past year, three child pornography cases have been unresolved due to lack of information. Arizona investigators report the same situation at Phoenix Public Libraries. Child pornography incidents that have been traced to public libraries are often unresolved because libraries do not enable simple logging features that retain basic information about computer users.
4. In July 2007 a California crimes against children investigator cited an America online (AOL) child pornography case in which the offenders’ originating Internet protocol (IP) address resolved to a Proxy IP address. AOL had only retained the needed information for five days and could not identify who was using the targeted IP address at the time of the offense.
5. In July 2007 a California crimes against children investigator also reported that in one child pornography case the suspect used Cingular Wireless to connect to a Yahoo email account. Cingular only retains Internet protocol (IP) logs for two days and could not identify the subject. The investigator has since identified this subject from other IP addresses, but if the suspect had used only the Cingular connection, the investigation would have been extinguished.
6. In July 2007 an Arizona investigator reported that a 16 year old victim met a 23 year old suspect at the Internet social networking site, blackplanet.com. The two also communicated via text messaging through the ISP Sprint. During the text messages the suspect was informed by the victim that the victim was 16 years old. The investigator needed to retrieve the text messages in order to show the suspects knowledge that the victim was a minor. The retention time for text messages from Sprint is only 14 days and the required information was not available to the investigator.
7. In July 2007 a North Carolina investigator stated: “This (ISP retention and reporting issue) is still a problem. In North Carolina, Time Warner RoadRunner is not responding in a timely manner. When they do respond the answer is often: ‘The information you requested is no longer available’. Time Warner has advised our agency that we send more subpoenas than the rest of the state combined. According to Time Warner our frequent subpoenas cause them problems and they are considering charging us administrative fees. We advised Time Warner that the reason we submit a large number of subpoenas is because as the ICAC for the entire state our agency has subpoena privileges. There is a huge need for better retention requirements and laws. Time Warner is just one example.”
8. In July 2007 an Arizona prosecuting attorney cited three child pornography cases wherein Cox Communication provided responses stating that the Internet protocol address in question was stolen, with no further explanation. Repeated attempts to obtain additional information about that Internet protocol address and how it was compromised have been unproductive. Luckily, there was another online session with the defendant where the subpoena results pointed to the defendant.
9. In July 2007 a Massachusetts detective investigated a threats and sexual harassment case involving hearing impaired students at Northern Essex Community College. The students there use communication devices called “Sidekicks” that permit text messaging. The ISP’s involved were T-Mobile and Danger Co. The Sidekicks were sold by Danger Co. and Danger Co. was also responsible for serving the text traffic that went out over the devices. In several cases, the suspect sent messages to the Yahoo e-mail addresses of the victims. The investigator subpoenaed Yahoo and received six relevant IP addresses back from Yahoo. These IP addresses were each found to be owned by Danger Co. The investigator subpoenaed Danger Co. for subscriber information from all six IP’s. A representative of Danger Co. advised the investigator that the company does not keep a record of IP activity. The Danger Co. representative referred the investigator to T-Mobile stating that T-Mobile handled the information about the IP addresses being researched. T-Mobile referred the investigator back to Danger Co.
10. In 2007 an Arizona Internet crimes against children investigator states: Cell phone text messaging has been critically important to some of our cases involving minors and predators. The cell phone companies do not retain the messages or they purge them after a few days.
11. In a recent (2007) Michigan Internet crimes against children case involving Comcast, a preservation request and search warrant were sent to Comcast within the companies 30 day time frame for such requests but Comcast responded by stating that no data was found.
12. In 2007 a Texas investigator stated: “Verizon often claims technical problems prevent them from capturing data.” He cited eight stalled investigations involving child pornography and online solicitation cases that occurred in 2006 and 2007.
13. In July 2007 an Arizona Internet crimes against children investigator reported that the ISP Cox Communications did not provided needed log information related to the date of an offense that was specifically requested in a subpoena. The omission resulted in delays and extra follow-up work while the suspect continued to traffic child pornography via the Internet.
14. A Pennsylvania fraud investigator reported that in December 2006, four weeks after an order was mailed, the Earthlink legal department responded stating that they did not have access to the records about the requested Internet protocol address. Earthlink stated that the IP address in question was leased to Earthlink from Covad Communications. When the investigator inquired with Covad, he was informed that Covad had not retained the data. The Covad representative then referred the investigator back to Earthlink. As ofJuly 23, 2007 the investigator had not received a formal response from either company.
15. In July 2007 a Texas investigator worked a case involving a stolen laptop computer. The computer had a tracking device installed on it. The device sends a message with the IP address to a monitoring company if the laptop is reconnected to the Internet. In this case the device worked and the investigator was provided with the IP address from which the stolen laptop was being used. The IP address belonged to a RoadRunner subscriber account. Roadrunner was recently acquired by Comcast from Time Warner. Both companies informed the investigator that the IP is not one of their active accounts and to date there has been no subscriber information provided to the investigator.
16. In an Arizona identity theft case a Federal investigator spoke with a representative of the Earthlink/People PC compliance department on June 17, 2007, 40 days after the original subpoena was sent. The investigator was informed that the request would be handled the next day but as of July 23, 2007, there was still no response.
17. In August 2007, a Federal investigator in Arizona reported that after 22 days the ISP Cox Communications had not yet responded to two subpoenas involving a suspect who is believed to be actively molesting minors. The investigator said, “These types of turnaround times are clearly unacceptable.”
18. A Massachusetts Internet crimes against children investigator reported that as of August 20, 2007, the ISP Earthlink had not yet responded to a subpoena that was sent to them on April 19, 2007, a delay of four months…and counting. The investigator said, “I have called the legal department-subpoena compliance on at least four occasions. To date, I have received nothing.”
19. On July 11, 2007, an Arizona Internet crimes against children investigator sent a subpoena to Cox Communications requesting subscriber information about a suspect. There was no response from Cox. A second subpoena was sent on July 24, 2007. There was no response to the second subpoena. A third subpoena was sent on August 15, 2007. On August 17, 2007 the investigator phoned Cox and left a voice mail message with the subpoena compliance unit describing the problem and requesting an immediate response to the subpoena. The subpoena was again sent via fax to Cox on August 17, 2007. On August 22, 2007 the investigator received a response to the subpoena. The delay was 42 days.
20. On July 31, 2007, an Arizona Internet crimes against children investigator sent a subpoena to Cox Communications requesting subscriber information about an Internet protocol address. There was no response from Cox. A second subpoena was sent on August 15, 2007. At the time of this report. (August 21, 2007) Cox still had not responded.
21. In July 2007 an Arizona child pornography investigator made several attempts to contact the Earthlink legal department to request information concerning their subpoena requirements. The investigator phoned a number and was informed that the number was disconnected. The investigator then phoned the Earthlink emergency/after hours number and heard the recorded announcement, “the Nextel customer is currently unavailable.” After several more failed attempts, the investigator searched the Internet for a customer service number and found 1-800-(number witheld). This number directs callers to a third party sales company and to an email address. The representative at the 800 number provided the investigator with a phone number for an Earthlink customer service representative but the representative would only provide a mailing address to the corporate office in Atlanta, GA. Through other sources the investigator found and called a phone number for the Earthlink legal department. This call resulted in a voice mail message that provided the investigator with an Atlanta mailing address and a voice prompt asking the caller to leave a message. The investigator left a voice message but as of a week later (July 30, 2007) Earthlink still had not responded.
22. In February 2006 a Texas child pornography investigator sent a subpoena to Earthlink requesting subscriber information related to a suspect’s IP address. When Earthlink did not respond, the investigator left several follow-up voice mails. The investigator spoke with an Earthlink representative who assured the investigator that the information would be sent via email the next day. It was not. A second subpoena was sent on April 4, 2007. Again there was no response from Earthlink. At the time of this report, (July 2007) seventeen months have passed since the original request and the information is now too old and stale for further follow-up.
23. In July 2007 a Pennsylvania Internet crimes against children investigator reported that 60 days after discovering two Verizon-affiliated Internet protocol addresses associated with child pornography the company reported that they had no record of either of the two addresses.
24. A former Missouri law enforcement officer who now works in private industry recalled past problems with the Time Warner (Roadrunner) company and with Earthlink. The investigator cited a homicide case in 2000 that involved an Earthlink subscriber. The former investigator said that during the investigation Earthlink did not respond to a request for information. The former investigator said, “Bad people are doing bad things and getting away with it simply because certain ISP’s won’t cooperate with law enforcement. Hopefully a framework can be set into place to encourage these ISP’s to comply with a legal subpoena or search warrant.”
25. In August 2007 Arizona ICAC investigators received a report involving 640 unlawful images of child pornography. They traced the Internet protocol (IP) number to the ISP Cableone. A subpoena was sent to Cableone requesting subscriber information for the user of the suspect IP address. In response to the subpoena, the associate general counsel from Cableone wrote:
Our information technology department researched this IP address and informed me that they are unable to gather any information useful to you in response to your subpoena. They are struggling with a software gremlin that has recently reared its ugly head and is corrupting the tables of our IP servers in the archiving process. Until this is corrected, much historical IP information has been and continues to be lost. They can give me no certain date when the problem will be resolved but they are working with our vendors to fix it as soon as possible.
26. In September 2007 a frustrated Arkansas ICAC investigator wrote to her nationwide colleagues:
Does anyone have a number for someone, anyone at Comcast who will return your calls? I have tried (name witheld) at 856-(number withheld) and the Comcast Legal Response Center at 856-(number withheld) and left numerous messages. No one will call me back. Any help will be appreciated.
Note: Shortly after the investigator posted the preceding message she received a return phone call from a Comcast representative.
Conclusion
A subpoena request for basic subscriber information is not a highly invasive query. Basic subcriber information includes only such items as the name, address and phone number of the user. Basic subscriber information does not include the private text of e-mails or chat conversations. The subpoena request for subsciber information differs from a more invasive search warrant request for content.
A search warrant request to an ISP for content produces information of a more private nature including such things as the text of private e-mails. The courts recognize that such information is deserving of a higher level of protection from law enforcement scrutiny and consequently requires a sworn affidavit and search warrant.
The most invasive (and expensive) form of law enforcement inquiry involves capturing real-time electronic communications and is commonly known as a wiretap. In law enforcement circles a wiretap is also often called a “Title III”, named after the Federal Wiretap Law. A court-ordered wiretap has additional requirements and time-constraints above and beyond those required of either a subpoena or search warrant.
The stories of investigations that ended because an ISP did not provide subscriber data are disheartening to those who seek to apprehend offenders and bring them to justice. The stories seem to indicate a need for a review of the data retention policies of Internet service providers.
Dr. Kardasz may be contacted via email at: kardasz@kardasz.org
Permalink
02.05.08
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 19:01 by Administrator
By Frank Kardasz and Richard Whidden, February 5, 2008
Introduction
Undercover on-line activities conducted by law enforcement officers using the Internet are important towards capturing Internet sexual predators and traffickers of child pornography. Undercover investigators painstakingly labor to establish believable fictitious personas during on-line investigations. Sometimes the personas are maintained for long periods of time. Publicizing details of undercover identities and divulging undercover on-line investigative techniques can be detrimental to ongoing investigations.
Deciding whether or not information about undercover operations should be publicized is sometimes a subject of debate among law enforcement professionals. When deciding whether or not to reveal undercover Internet investigations to the media, administrators and media relations personnel should consider the following questions:
Question: Does publicity of undercover Internet activities help educate good citizens and raise public awareness regarding Internet crime?
Answer: Yes, however alternative educational activities will have the same impact without damaging law enforcement operations (1). Internet Safety seminars can be conducted without discussing discuss specific undercover tactics.
Question: Does publicizing undercover Internet activities have a deterrent effect on potential offenders?
Answer: Probably not. Some studies indicate that sexual predators are undeterred by any treatment or warning. Their sexual attractions are similar in strength to the attraction to drugs by addicts, with even less promise of eventual change and rehabilitation (2).
Example Case:
An Arizona Internet predator postponed his planned sexual encounter because he had seen a media report of an arrest in a nearby jurisdiction. He never canceled the meeting, only postponed it. The media reports only protracted and delayed the investigation. The report did not prevent the crime, it only delayed and temporarily frustrated the investigation.
Media exposure is sometimes frustrating when a planned arrest is imminent and investigators have carefully organized a safe operation only to be delayed and then required to re-organize later. When an undercover Internet operation is exposed in one jurisdiction, those who publicize it may be unwittingly impacting an ongoing investigation in another jurisdiction.
Example Case:
Using e-mail, one British predator sent the actual wording from the Arizona State law to his young intended victim in Arizona . Along with the wording from the law he stated in his e-mail, “We have to be careful because I can get in trouble.” His demonstrated knowledge of the law did not deter him. He traveled from the United Kingdom intending to meet the victim for sex but was arrested instead. His arrest received media attention, but undercover investigative techniques did not. And after his release from jail he again attempted to contact the victim.
Question: Does publicizing undercover Internet activities educate offenders as to law enforcement methods?
Answer: Yes, potentially making them wiser regarding law enforcement tactics, with the consequence that they, like drug offenders, continually develop new counter-tactics to thwart law enforcement. Savvy Internet predators, educated by the media, are now challenging undercover officers on-line, asking them prove that they are not cops. Predators are being further schooled each time Internet investigative techniques are revealed.
Example Case:
One Arizona offender collected newspaper and Internet media reports of sex crime investigations, attempting to educate himself about law enforcement tactics. A stack of printed news releases was found among his belongings during a search warrant.
Question: The media will get the information eventually through public records requests or by listening at trial so why not give the information away now?
Answer: Perhaps the media will eventually get the information, but details do not become public record until after the investigation is complete, with an option for law enforcement to redact confidential information. Some information will come out at trial, but most reporters will not sit through the proceeding or take the time to read the transcripts later.
In most cases the arrest occurs at the same time as seizure of the suspect’s computer. The computer often holds information regarding additional crimes and victims. Widespread media coverage may hinder follow-up investigation if the case involves accomplices who cannot be identified until the computer forensics exam is completed.
Certain undercover techniques remain protected through case law. A reporter with the patience and perseverance to submit a public records request, or sit through a trial might be attentive enough to obtain some information. Instead of giving the information away and risking investigative problems, let the media work for the information.
Question: Everybody knows that the police on-line undercover work, what is wrong with publicizing it?
Answer: It is a misconception to believe that everyone knows the details of on-line undercover work. Everyone does not know, and publicizing the exact details unnecessarily reveals tactics and improperly educates the offenders.
Question: Does publicizing successful undercover Internet activities aggrandize the investigating and prosecuting agency?
Answer: Yes.
Question: Do some people and agencies require publicity and aggrandizement to motivate funding sources, further individual careers, or gain re-election?
Answer: Unfortunately, yes.
Question: What circumstances permit law enforcement to withhold information from release?
Answer: Case law permits certain details of undercover investigations to remain undisclosed during the life of the investigation. There is a qualified privilege to protect sensitive investigative techniques from disclosure (3). Courts have noted that, “disclosure depends upon the particular circumstances of each case and is determined by balancing the public’s interest in non-disclosure against a defendant’s interest in cross-examination and accurate fact finding” (4).
Additionally, statutes may protect this information from public records disclosure. For example, under the Federal Freedom of Information Act, an exception to the public records disclosure requirements can prevent the release of records or information complied for law enforcement purposes (5). Similar protections also exist in state statutory law (6).
Protected Information
In undercover on-line Internet investigations, sensitive information might include the following:
- Screen name and e-mail address of the undercover officer.
- Gender of the undercover officers’ fictitious persona.
- Age of the undercover officers’ fictitious persona.
- Arrest/meeting location if the location is being used frequently and during other ongoing investigations.
- Specific undercover techniques, tactics and conversations.
Conclusion
On-line undercover officers labor to establish believable fictitious personas’ and their endeavors should be protected whenever possible. Law enforcement administrators should examine policies related to the release of information and consult with legal advisors and prosecutors before revealing sensitive undercover tactics.
Notes
(1) see the following Internet crime-prevention organizations:
National Law Center for Children and Families – http://www.nationallawcenter.org
I Keep Safe – http://www.ikeepsafe.org
Netsmartz – http://www.netsmartz.org/
ISafe – http://www.isafe.org/
Enough is Enough – http://www.enough.org/
(2) Davey, M. and Goodnough, A. (March 4, 2007). Doubts rise as states hold sex offenders. New York Times. Retrieved December 30, 2007 from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/04/us/04civil.html
(3) Walker , J.S. (May, 2000). The qualified privilege to protect sensitive investigative
techniques from disclosure. FBI Bulletin.pp.26-31. Retrieved December
(4) See e.g. Johnson v. Maryland , 811 A.2d 898, 900 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2002) citing
U.S. v. Green, 670 F.2d 1148 (D.C. Cir 1981).
(5) 5.5 United States Code § 552 (b)(7). As to Justice Department documents see 28 CFR §16.26(b).5. 5 United States Code.
(6) See e.g. §119.071(2), Florida Statutes.
———————————————————————–
Frank Kardasz is Project Director for the Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force.
Richard R. Whidden, Jr. is Executive Director and Senior Counsel of the National Law Center for Children and Families.
NOTE: The preceding article is for education and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice nor legal opinion on any specific matter. The information does not create, and receipt does not constitute a lawyer-client relationship between the authors and the reader. The reader should not act upon the information provided herein without consulting the readers own counsel.
Permalink
02.04.08
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 05:28 by Administrator
Kardasz: Computers at public libraries are used by child pornography traffickers and by sexual predators who wish to lure and entice minors. Please encourage computer restrictions and monitoring at your library that will inhibit offenders. Here are examples of some sad incidents from various locations throughout the United States.
Arizona
Child Pornography Suspect Sentenced
On February 20 2004, 24 year old Gary Lee Davis plead guilty in Maricopa County Superior Court to one count of sexual exploitation of a minor for possessing child pornography. The case began on March 24 2003, when a horrified patron of the Cholla branch of the Phoenix Public library at 10050 Metro Parkway East noticed that Davis was viewing child pornography on a public-access computer there.
The alert patron notified the lethargic library staff and repeatedly demanded that police be notified. As Davis fled in a vehicle, responding Phoenix Police officers stopped and arrested him nearby. Davis was found in possession of dozens of disturbing images of children being sexually exploited. Investigators were unable to substantiate added allegations that Davis had committed child molestation. He was permitted to plead guilty before Judge Granville to possession of one unlawful image and received the Arizona minimum mandatory sentence for the offense, ten years prison. Davis also received lifetime probation and will be required to register as a sex offender upon his release.
Nevada
August 2005
Yesterday it was reported that: “A 29-year-old Reno man was arrested on 10 counts of suspicion of possession of child pornography Wednesday, after someone reported he was viewing sexual images of children on a computer at a public library in northwest Reno, Washoe County sheriff’s deputies said.”
The Washoe County (Nev.) Library does not require patrons to use filters (policy at http://www.washoe.lib.nv.us/mod.php?mod=userpage&menu=1552&page_id=38 ).
Florida
Patrons’ visits to porn sites may cost librarian her job
VALPARAISO – A Florida librarian has been suspended and may be fired by officials upset that a registered sex offender and three boys allegedly used the city library’s computers to access pornographic Internet sites. Sue Martin, head librarian at the Valparaiso Community Library, was suspended with pay and will receive a hearing within 60 days, City Attorney Doug Wyckoff said Thursday. City Commissioner Robert Billingsley said he will ask the commission to dismiss Martin but declined to elaborate on why he thinks she failed to do enough to keep patrons from using the computers to find pornography. Hard drives have been removed from the computers and the public has been prohibited from using them until further notice. Martin does not have a telephone listing under her name, but she wrote a letter to Billingsley, who oversees library matters for the commission, after the sex offender allegedly viewed a pornographic site July 25. “We continually enforce our policy by monitoring all computers,” she wrote. “Any suspicious use is immediately checked by accessing the history of the patrons’ Web use. In addition, the staff monitors the patrons’ use by ‘walkthroughs’ of the computer areas.” The library’s Internet policy forbids using computers for “illegal or fraudulent activity” or displaying “images which other library users may find offensive to view.” Parents or guardians must sign a responsibility contract before minors can use the computers, acknowledging they are strictly for educational purposes and that it’s impossible for staff to restrict access to all controversial materials. Michael Bushee, 25, was charged with possession of child pornography several days after he allegedly accessed porn on a library computer. Police said they found computer discs, tapes and pictures of child pornography at his home. Billingsley said Police Chief Joseph Hart a week later told him that three juveniles also had viewed pornographic material on a library computer.
Bob Gorin, coordinator of Okaloosa County’s public library cooperative, said each library has its own policy but typically have staff walk by computers and look at sites being visited. Blocking software is available but is easy to get around, Gorin said. A call to the American Library Association for comment Friday was not immediately returned.
Washington
Sex offender arrested for child porn
By Lisa Curdy – Daily World Writer
After officers found a garbage can full of child pornography, a Hoquiam police lieutenant posed online as an 11 – year – old boy and received a lot more garbage. A convicted sex offender allegedly e – mailed him images of adults violating children and children having sex with other children. Steven L. Jordan, 53, was jailed and charged today in Grays Harbor Superior Court with dealing and possessing child pornography. A Level I registered sex offender – a category reserved for those who bear monitoring but are rated least likely to reoffend
Jordan was convicted in 1987 of two counts of first – degree statutory rape, according to Deputy Prosecutor Jason Richards. Jordon was arrested Wednesday afternoon at his residence in the 200 block of West First Street in Aberdeen. He’s lived there for the past six months, police said. Police found graphic sexual images involving adult men and several young boys as well as a pre – pubescent girl, according to the Prosecutor’s Office. Additional images found on a computer that Jordan had used at the Aberdeen Timberland Library were similar to those found in the garbage can, according to the State Patrol Crime Lab. He could face additional charges following the forensic examination of his home computers, according to the Hoquiam Police Department and the arrest warrant. Hoquiam Police began investigating Jordan on March 21 after checking out a report of a methamphetamine lab at his former residence in the 100 block of 23rd Street.
County Drug Task Force agents found a small meth lab and while searching outside the home, discovered a garbage can that contained “what appeared to be minor children engaged in sexually explicit acts, including photos of nude boys fondling each other,” according to a Hoquiam Police memo.
Detectives obtained another search warrant and began sifting through the can’s contents. They say it was crammed with downloaded pornographic pictures of young boys, e – mails discussing slavery, bondage and child sex, as well as bills and Department of Social & Health Services statements in Jordan’s name. Detectives Joe Strong and David Cox took fingerprints from some of the photos. The Crime Lab determined that “several of the fingerprints” were Jordan’s.
Meantime, Lt. Jim Maloney, the acting police chief, posed as an 11 – year – old and sent an e – mail to one of the addresses found inside the garbage can. “Almost immediately, Lt. Maloney began receiving e – mail messages,” Hoquiam Police said in a statement. “This person described himself as a 12 – year – old boy from Hoquiam.” A picture of young children – boys and girls – having sex was sent on April 25 to Maloney’s fictitiously named e – mail account.
Detective Strong had received a call from an Aberdeen Library employee, who said the staff had seen Jordan using an “isolated” library computer on April 8. The computer was immediately seized and the data analyzed. It was more of the same. During the search of Jordan’s home Wednesday, police found “several computers and other possible child pornography,” as well as a bill for the computer e – mail account that Lt. Maloney had been receiving e – mail from, according to the arrest warrant.
The Grays Harbor Daily World August 8, 2002 http://www.thedailyworld.com/daily/2002/Aug-08-Thu-2002/news/news3.html
Massachusetts
Former library director indicted on porn, assault charges July 14, 2005 SALEM, Mass.
The former director of Beverly’s public library has been indicted on child pornography and other charges in connection with a relationship he had with a teenage boy he met at the library. Thomas Scully, 56, was indicted on Wednesday on seven counts of possession of child pornography, as well as indecent assault and battery and disseminating material harmful to a minor. Scully was director for 19 years until he retired earlier this year two weeks after he was charged.
Scully allegedly met the then 15-year-old boy at the library two years ago while the boy was visiting a sexually explicit chat room on a library computer. Scully invited the boy to his home where he showed him gay pornographic movies and allowed him access to X-rated Web sites, prosecutors said. The boy said he visited Scully’s home hundreds of times. Police learned of the relationship when the boy’s foster father reported that Scully gave the boy gifts. During one visit, Scully allegedly grabbed the boy’s buttocks, prosecutors said. Scully’s lawyer has said his client is innocent.
The indictments move the case from the district court to Salem Superior Court, where he will be arraigned within the several weeks. Scully has been free on his own recognizance since April, under the condition that he stay away from the Beverly Public Library as well as the boy and his family.
Information from: The Salem News, http://www.salemnews.com/
Nevada
Child porn case spotlights libraries’ Internet policies
Martha Bellisle RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL Posted: 4/13/2005 12:01 am
Whenever staff at the county library passed near Jeffrey Olson as he scrolled through Internet sites, he would quickly change his screen, but when a nearby computer user saw pictures of naked children, he called the sheriff’s office. Olson, 30, who was using one of the Washoe County Library’s adult, nonfiltered computers in northwest Reno to download child pornography, was arrested and charged with 13 counts of possession.
He pleaded guilty to two counts, and on Tuesday was sentenced to five years of probation, a punishment both the prosecution and defense agreed was appropriate for someone who had no criminal record and wasn’t likely to hurt anyone. While his case drew little media attention, it sparked intense discussions among library officials about how to handle suspected illegal behavior by computer users. The issue, the first of its kind in Washoe County, ultimately provoked the county library’s Board of Trustees this year to change procedures for handling suspicious activity on the Internet so that library visitors can continue to enjoy their intellectual freedom while illegal conduct is halted, said Dianne Varnon, manager of the northwest Reno library.
Before Olson’s arrest, library staff members were uncertain about whether they needed solid proof of illegal behavior before calling in law enforcement. Now, the staff has a list of guidelines to follow when suspicions are sparked, Varnon said. The staff members are now encouraged to call 911, notify managers, preserve evidence, turn off the computer’s monitor and even remove the computer’s mouse and keyboard or disconnect the Ethernet cable if appropriate, according to the official procedures. “We take Internet use very seriously, particularly how children might interact with the Internet,” Varnon said.
The board sought to ensure safe use of their computers, while “balancing that against a person’s right to reach sites that they need to reach.” Olson had been viewing questionable sites at the library’s northwest branch on several occasions, said Chief Deputy District Attorney Dave Clifton, but was not caught until the man using the computer near him called in the sheriff Sept. 29. “We didn’t get him the first time,” Clifton said. Once the sheriff’s office became involved, deputies searched Olson’s personal computer and found pictures that he had brought home to view, Clifton said. Olson’s lawyer, Shelly O’Neill, said he is “young and very naïve for his age” and didn’t realize the serious nature of his actions. She also said the worst offenders are getting away with the worst crime. “I adamantly believe that people like my client are the least culpable in these cases,” she said. “The most culpable are the people who create the pornography in the first place. “It seems like the very bad actors are escaping prosecution.” “That’s one thing we’re working on,” said Jeff Clark, a detective with the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office who handles Internet crimes. “But the Internet thing is so much bigger than anyone can imagine.”
While the FBI investigates the sources of the sites, his agency focuses on the users, he said. And it does not take much to commit a crime, he said. “As soon as you bring child pornography on to your computer, that’s when it becomes illegal,” he said, adding it does not have to be downloaded to be against the law.
But O’Neill said the question of whether viewing actually qualifies as possession under the law has not been tested. Like many of the legal issues surrounding the Internet, much is unsettled, she said. “The technology is exceeding the legal research and court rulings,” she said. “It’s happening fast.”
One area that has been clarified came from a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2003. Congress had passed the Children’s Internet Protection Act in 2000, stating that libraries that fail to use filtering software on their computers cannot have access to certain federal funds. A federal judge ruled the law unconstitutional, but on appeal, the high court said the law was valid.
In response to the ruling, Washoe County library officials reviewed their options and decided to use filters on some computers, but not all, said Larry Schritchfield, the county’s Internet services librarian. In the northwest branch, for example, the library has 13 computers with Internet access, Varnon said. Six are adult-only, nonfiltered machines, while seven have filters, she said. Children wishing to use nonfiltered computers must have parental approval, she said. That decision meant the loss of some funding, Schritchfield said, but that was acceptable. “We weren’t getting that much funding to begin with,” he said, “and the application process was onerous. “Filters work imperfectly,” he added. “They let some things through that you don’t want, and block other things that are legitimate.”
Massachusetts
On 9/26, it was reported: “A 46-year-old man wanted in Arizona for failing to register as a sex offender was arrested at the Boston Public Library yesterday where he used a computer to try to lure a 12-year-old Maryland girl, police said.”
In Boston, *which accepts e-rate funds under CIPA but allows patrons to disable filteirng* (policy at http://www.bpl.org/general/policies/internet_pol.htm )
http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=46013
Florida
In Florida at the Lee County Library, The News-Press reported on 9/23 that: “A convicted sex offender who admitted downloading child pornography from the Internet at a Lee County public library has been indicted in federal court…Lee County Library Director Cynthia Cobb said the library system has installed software that blocks pornography on computers used by children. But computers used by adults have full links to the Internet.”
http://vh10066.v1.moc.gbahn.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040923/NEWS01/4 09230435/1075
New York
MAN ADMITS DOWNLOADING PORN AT LIBRARY; STUDENTS COMPLAINED ABOUT “DIRTY OLD MAN.’ PORNOGRAPHY WAS OF CHILDREN.
The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY) October 23, 2004 By Jim O’Hara Staff writer
A Syracuse man charged with using a public library to download child pornography last year avoided a trial by pleading guilty Friday. Wayne E. Harding, 50, of 469 James St., pleaded guilty before Onondaga County Judge Anthony Aloi to a single felony count of possessing a sexual performance by a child in the discovery of child pornography on a computer at Upstate Medical University’s Health Sciences Library at Weiskotten Hall. Assistant District Attorney Gary Dawson said it was the first local prosecution of a defendant on criminal charges relating to pornography on a public computer. The trial was expected to begin Monday.
Harding was facing 12 counts of possessing the sexual performance of a child as a result of the dozen images he accessed on the library’s computer Feb.27, 2003, prosecutors said. The images depicted someone younger than 16 engaged in sexually explicit activity. The case was expected to come down to a battle of computer experts in court next week as the sides wrangled over whether the evidence was sufficient to link Harding to the computer containing the pornographic images. “I thought I could win,” defense lawyer Eric Jeschke said Friday as he left court following Harding’s guilty plea. That plea, Jeschke said, had come “as a complete surprise to me.” Jeschke said he and Harding were in court Friday morning only to have the defendant waive his right to a jury trial so Aloi alone would preside over the trial set to begin Monday. Harding opted to plead guilty in a deal that calls for him to be sentenced to 1 1/2 to three years in prison, Jeschke said. According to Dawson, a number of students had complained to the librarian about “a dirty old man” viewing pictures of nude and partially clothed children on the library’s computer.
Campus security was notified after the librarian watched for about 10 minutes as the man viewed similar types of images, Dawson said. A security officer also watched as the suspect continued to view pornographic images on the computer before confronting him, Dawson said. Harding claimed the images had accidentally come on as “pop ups” and that he was equally offended by them, the prosecutor said. Authorities issued Harding a trespass notice barring him from returning to the library and escorted him from the building, Dawson said. In writing up a report of the incident, security officials discovered that Harding was registered as a Level 3 sex offender on the sex offender registry, the prosecutor said. Upon further investigation, officials discovered Harding also was on federal supervised release for a child pornography conviction.
Federal officials were notified and the library computer was seized and sent out for examination, Dawson said. According to the prosecutor, authorities discovered a great deal of “child erotica” images on the computer in addition to a number of images that would be considered pornographic. Twelve of those pornographic images were accessed on the computer the day Harding was escorted from the library, Dawson said. Those pornographic images had been accessed about five hours before Harding was escorted from the premises, but witnesses placed Harding in the library at that computer for that entire period, Dawson said. But Jeschke said the evidence showed those 12 images had last been accessed in only about a 40-second time period and he said he was prepared to have a computer expert testify there was no way to show that the images had actually been called up on the computer screen and viewed by anyone in particular. The defense also was challenging whether Harding had any control over the computer images. But Dawson was prepared to show that he did, based on evidence that during the time Harding was on the computer, some of the erotic images had been uploaded to another computer by the user. The two sides had been preparing to battle in court even though Harding had admitted possessing child pornography when he pleaded guilty in federal court to violating his release on supervised probation and was sentenced to eight months in prison, according to Assistant U.S. Attorney Lisa Fletcher. Fletcher said Harding was supposed to have no contact with a computer at all as a condition of his release on the prior child pornography conviction. Aloi had ruled, however, that the admission to the probation violation could not be used as evidence against Harding in the County Court pornography-possession case, Dawson said
Maryland
Child porn incident lands former law judge back in prison
By BRIAN M. SCHLETER, Staff Writer
A former state administrative law judge who was caught looking at child pornography at a public library – while he was on probation for molesting an Annapolis boy — was sentenced yesterday to 5 years in prison. Marvin Lee Teal, formerly of Baltimore, “is a pedophile” and “is clearly a threat (to children). There’s no question in my mind,” said Circuit Court Judge Nancy Davis-Loomis. Teal, 53, has been convicted four times of sexually abusing minors, prosecutors said. Teal was a judge with the Maryland Office of Administrative Hearings in the early 1990s.
In 1994 he received a pair of suspended sentences in Howard County for abusing young boys. He was on probation in those cases when he was arrested for molesting an 11-year-old Annapolis boy during a five-month period in 1996. They met at an area shopping center where the boy’s mother had a business. The child spent time there after school and got to know Teal, who also worked at the center. A year later a judge sentenced him to serve 18 months, suspending the rest of his seven-year sentence. Teal was serving several sentences when he was paroled on March 1, 2003. Six weeks later police in Baltimore charged him with downloading pornographic images of minors at the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore. A federal grand jury indicted Teal in that case Jan. 29. A trial is set for July 19. Teal received sex offender therapy in prison. But he said he had just $67 in his pocket and the clothes on his back when he was released. He had no job or home and became depressed, unable to cope with his new reality. “Treatment can be an up-and-down process,” he said. But a prison psychologist who treated Teal for three years said he was not cooperative. Teal seemed unmotivated and eventually withdrew from the voluntary group. “In my opinion he should have continued (treatment),” said Edward Diamond Jr. Judge Davis-Loomis found there was enough evidence in the Baltimore library case to convict Teal of breaking the rule of his probation that he have no contact with children. Assistant State’s Attorney Laura Kiessling encouraged the judge “to keep this community’s children as safe as (you) can for as long as (you) can” by imposing the remaining 5 years Teal had hanging over his head for the 1997 conviction. Teal’s attorney, Assistant Public Defender Michele Vignola, asked that the case be closed without more jail time since
Teal could face a significant federal prison sentence if convicted in U.S. District Court. “He’s not going anywhere fast,” she said. — bschleter@capitalgazette.com
http://www.hometownannapolis.com/cgi-bin/read/2004/05_04-14/TOP
Arkansas
Child porn -Library porn – A 36 year old registered sex offender and pervert was recently arrested for downloading child pornography at an Arkansas public library. Allen Terry served time in prison for one count of child molestation in 1995 in Jasper, Indiana. This problem can be avoided if libraries use a full-time filter. Unfortunately, the Rogers Public Library only employs an “optional” filter for those who request it. Ironically, this did absolutely nothing to stop this pedophile down from carrying out his mission.
http://www.nwaonline.net/277785127838537.bsp
Washington
Sex offender arrested for child porn
By Lisa Curdy – Daily World Writer
After officers found a garbage can full of child pornography, a Hoquiam police lieutenant posed online as an 11 – year – old boy and received a lot more garbage. A convicted sex offender allegedly e – mailed him images of adults violating children and children having sex with other children. Steven L. Jordan, 53, was jailed and charged today in Grays Harbor Superior Court with dealing and possessing child pornography. A Level I registered sex offender – a category reserved for those who bear monitoring but are rated least likely to reoffend – Jordan was convicted in 1987 of two counts of first – degree statutory rape, according to Deputy Prosecutor Jason Richards. Jordon was arrested Wednesday afternoon at his residence in the 200 block of West First Street in Aberdeen. He’s lived there for the past six months, police said. Police found graphic sexual images involving adult men and several young boys as well as a pre – pubescent girl, according to the Prosecutor’s Office. Additional images found on a computer that Jordan had used at the Aberdeen Timberland Library were similar to those found in the garbage can, according to the State Patrol Crime Lab.
He could face additional charges following the forensic examination of his home computers, according to the Hoquiam Police Department and the arrest warrant. Hoquiam Police began investigating Jordan on March 21 after checking out a report of a methamphetamine lab at his former residence in the 100 block of 23rd Street. County Drug Task Force agents found a small meth lab and while searching outside the home, discovered a garbage can that contained “what appeared to be minor children engaged in sexually explicit acts, including photos of nude boys fondling each other,” according to a Hoquiam Police memo.
Detectives obtained another search warrant and began sifting through the can’s contents. They say it was crammed with downloaded pornographic pictures of young boys, e – mails discussing slavery, bondage and child sex, as well as bills and Department of Social & Health Services statements in Jordan’s name. Detectives Joe Strong and David Cox took fingerprints from some of the photos. The Crime Lab determined that “several of the fingerprints” were Jordan’s. Meantime,
Lt. Jim Maloney, the acting police chief, posed as an 11 – year – old and sent an e – mail to one of the addresses found inside the garbage can. “Almost immediately, Lt. Maloney began receiving e – mail messages,” Hoquiam Police said in a statement. “This person described himself as a 12 – year – old boy from Hoquiam.” A picture of young children – boys and girls – having sex was sent on April 25 to Maloney’s fictitiously named e – mail account.
Detective Strong had received a call from an Aberdeen Library employee, who said the staff had seen Jordan using an “isolated” library computer on April 8. The computer was immediately seized and the data analyzed. It was more of the same. During the search of Jordan’s home Wednesday, police found “several computers and other possible child pornography,” as well as a bill for the computer e – mail account that Lt. Maloney had been receiving e – mail from, according to the arrest warrant.
The Grays Harbor Daily World August 8, 2002 http://www.thedailyworld.com/daily/2002/Aug-08-Thu-2002/news/news3.html
Minnesota
Librarians Win Hostile Work Environment Lawsuit
MINNEAPOLIS – The city’s public library will consider using Internet filters to restrict patrons’ access to online porn, and will pay $435,000 to a dozen librarians who said easy access to the images resulted in a hostile work environment, the librarians’ lawyer said Friday. Library officials released a statement confirming the settlement, but did not mention the amount. Among other measures, the officials said they would consider Internet filters and an increase in the penalties for those who violate the library’s
Internet policy. The library did not admit any wrongdoing. The issue arose in 1997, when librarians complained that staffers were being regularly exposed to pornographic images. Concern grew as patrons, including children, also were exposed to the graphic material. The librarians complained to state and federal agencies, and in 2001 the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission found probable cause that federal law had been violated because of a sexually hostile work environment. The case was referred to the Justice Department, which decided not to sue the library. The librarians filed a federal lawsuit in March.
AP US & WorldFriday, August 15, 2003 9:20:00 PM
The Associated Press. AP US & WorldFriday, August 15, 2003 9:20:00 P
Permalink
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 05:27 by Administrator
The Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force needs your help locating this suspect wanted for luring a minor for sexual exploitation which occurred on 01-24-02, in Phoenix, Arizona.
- Sarvpreet Sing Thapar, I/M, age 31
- Suspect is wanted for luring a minor over the Internet and offering money in exchange for sexual intercourse.
If you have any information on this suspect please contact the Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force at (602) 262-6151 or Silent Witness.
Permalink
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 05:25 by Administrator
By Dr. Kardasz
05-18-06 / 1030 hours, Phoenix, AZ
Offense: Sexual Exploitation of a Minor (child pornography)
Arrested: Ray Sanchez, H/M age 24, unmarried, no children, occupation-driver.
Agencies: AZ ICAC / Phoenix P.D. / Phoenix FBI
In April 2006, detectives of the Arizona ICAC and initiated an investigation that led to a computer in Phoenix believed to contain felony images of child pornography. On April 14, 2006 a subpoena requesting subscriber information about the suspect computer was sent to the Internet service provider, Cox Communications. When there was no response to the subpoena, second subpoena was sent. On May 15, 2006, Cox Communications responded and provided information leading to the offender.
After further investigation, a search warrant was prepared and served at an apartment in Phoenix that was being leased by 24 year old Ray Sanchez. The thirty-day delay by Cox Communications in processing the subpoena almost proved fatal to the investigation as detectives found eviction paperwork in the apartment and very little furniture, indicating that the Sanchez was preparing to depart very soon.
Agents of the Phoenix FBI assisted in the search. Sanchez was not home at the time of the search but his computer was examined by a computer forensics expert of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and found to contain unlawful images. The computer and other items of evidence were seized.
Sanchez, who works as a driver for a transportation company, was located shortly thereafter and made admissions to the offense.
Sanchez was booked for ten counts of sexual exploitation of a minor (child pornography) and booked into the Maricopa County Jail. The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office will lead the prosecution of the case.
Permalink
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 05:24 by Administrator
June 22, 2006
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
Dialogue on Social Networking Web Sites
Washington D.C.
Statement of Dr. Frank Kardasz, Project Director
Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force
BACKGROUND
Thank you for inviting me today. I have spent the last six of my 27 years in law enforcement doing some of the most important police work possible. It is the work of protecting children and teens from Internet sexual predators and traffickers of child pornography.
This type of police work is still in its relative infancy. Some cops are still computer novices. Some of us think that a social networking site is the local Fraternal Order of Police Lodge. So we cops are working to catch up. Getting our law enforcement arms around the growing problem of Internet crime is a momentous task. By way of analogy, some days I feel like we are trying to restrain King Kong with a tiny rubber band. But thanks to the DOJ Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, we continue to improve.
SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES
With regards to social networking sites, they provide users with a lawful service. They provide an attractive method of communication. Owners of the sites sometimes profit from advertisers who know that the popularity of the sites provide important venues for attracting people to their products. There is nothing inherently evil about either of those motives. The challenge comes from trying to filter out the criminals who use the services with evil intent.
THE LAW ENFORCEMENT ENVIRONMENT
Law enforcement cannot do as much in this area as it would like to. Law enforcement resources are often absorbed by those crimes for which there is a public outcry. Overall, there is less of a public outcry for the enforcement of Internet crimes against children than there is for many other crimes. In recent years Federal resources are drawn to terrorism, drug enforcement and border control, all of which have great national importance. Local resources are drawn to homicides, gangs, drugs, burglaries, and other offenses of great local importance. Consequently, we who fight Internet crime are often understaffed. That’s also partly because children are often marginalized by society. They have no voice. Very young children, those whose tortured images we see when we investigate child pornography incidents, cannot call 911. They cannot call the news media, they cannot write to an elected official. They cannot vote.
Sometimes the crimes are so devastatingly surreal that we cannot wrap our logical minds around the possibility that anyone would do such things to a child. Some of the most hardened and cynical cops I know cannot work Internet crimes against children because they cannot endure the attendant emotional hardship that comes with witnessing the inhumane suffering of innocent children.
So I am pleased to see all of you here today and see that we are working on these tough issues.
CASE STUDIES
Now I would like to show two case studies from the Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force involving social networking sites.
The first case involves a man who called himself “Danny” on his web page. We learned about Danny because an alert parent was monitoring her childs Internet use and personally knew of Danny because he lived in the same neighborhood as the woman. She also knew that he is a registered sex offender. We learned that Danny (not his real name) was also registered sex offender in Arizona. There is no mention of his sex offender status on his web page and he advertises himself as a lover of poetry who is looking for a girlfriend. Although his original web page is no longer available, Danny is not subject to any computer restrictions and is free to continue advertising himself if he so chooses.
The second case involves a man who advertised himself on his web page as “International man of adventure.” A parent in Louisiana installed monitoring software on her daughters computer and found that the minor was communicating with a man from Arizona. The incident was reported to the Louisiana ICAC Task Force, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and the Arizona ICAC Task Force. Detectives from my Arizona Task Force learned the mans true identity and discovered that he was wanted on a felony sexual assault warrant in Arizona. He is now in custody awaiting trial for the sex assault charge.
OFFENDERS
Unlike spectacular and riveting crimes and events involving crashes, explosions, shootings and widespread newsworthy bloodletting, the evil crimes against children are committed in dark and private places by offenders who sometimes psychologically groom and control their victims into silence. In cases involving predators who use social networking sites, the psychological grooming and control process begins with the offenders carefully constructed web page. They may pose as friendly adults, or as other children of the same age, or they may just browse and search and stalk the millions of web pages until they find just the right target and gather just enough information to permit them to locate and capture a victim.
Once we learn of the offense, law enforcement investigators must scramble to issue subpoenas and hope that the Internet service provider retained the data so we can find the offender.
VICTIMS
I’m convinced that that the quiet crimes committed when an adult sexual predator meets a curious unsupervised teenager to engage in sex acts are often unreported. Often the minor returns home without his or her parents ever finding out. We learned of one such case in Arizona when an undercover officer from my task force was posing as a child and subsequently arrested a predator. We learned that the offender had met and victimized two girls to whom he had also given sexually transmitted diseases. In their shame, the girls had never notified anyone of the crimes. The distraught parents only learned of the offenses when my detectives informed them of the suspect’s confessions.
SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM
Some will say, it’s not that big a problem; the crime statistics are not large. And that will seem to be true because these crimes are underreported. Defenders of free speech and privacy will demand numbers and statistics to justify change. How many incidents? How many sexual assaults? How many children? How many deaths? But ask yourselves; what is an acceptable number of children lost to Internet sexual predators and child pornography traffickers? For me, the answer is none.
I hope we will find some common ground that allows continued social networking while controlling the criminals who abuse the privilege.
I trust that we will not mentally disassociate ourselves from the victims for the sake of financial gain or a misguided sense of freedom of expression or protection of privacy. I know that the proprietors of social networking sites are responsible individuals who share our respect for the rights of children to grow up happy and innocent.
My Massachusetts ICAC Task Force colleague, Sgt. Steve DelNegro, will talk some more in a few minutes about the other kinds of cases we are seeing and provide some recommendations for your consideration.
I will be happy to take questions later.
Thank you
Permalink
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 05:23 by Administrator
Dr. Kardasz: In the following news report, the idea that Internet service providers (ISP) should simply preserve data is mischaracterized as “snooping”. I support legislation that requires ISP’s to preserve data. The data would remain secure with the ISP and not subject to inspection by law enforcement except upon issuance of legal process in the form of a subpoena for subscriber information or a search warrant for content information. Subpoenas and search warrants are not “snooping”, they are part of lawful investigative processes.
——————————————————————————
Congress may make ISPs snoop on you
By Declan McCullagh, 05/16/06, Cnetnews.com
A prominent Republican on Capitol Hill has prepared legislation that would rewrite Internet privacy rules by requiring that logs of Americans’ online activities be stored, CNET News.com has learned. The proposal comes just weeks after Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Internet service providers should retain records of user activities for a “reasonable amount of time,” a move that represented a dramatic shift in the Bush administration’s views on privacy.
Wisconsin Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is proposing that ISPs be required to record information about Americans’ online activities so that police can more easily “conduct criminal investigations.” Executives at companies that fail to comply would be fined and imprisoned for up to one year.
In addition, Sensenbrenner’s legislation–expected to be announced as early as this week–also would create a federal felony targeted at bloggers, search engines, e-mail service providers and many other Web sites. It’s aimed at any site that might have “reason to believe” it facilitates access to child pornography–through hyperlinks or a discussion forum, for instance.
Speaking to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children last month, Gonzales warned of the dangers of pedophiles using the Internet anonymously and called for new laws from Congress. “At the most basic level, the Internet is used as a tool for sending and receiving large amounts of child pornography on a relatively anonymous basis,” Gonzales said.
Until Gonzales’ speech, the Bush administration had explicitly opposed laws requiring data retention, saying it had “serious reservations” (click here for PDF) about them. But after the European Parliament last December approved such a requirement for Internet, telephone and voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers, top administration officials began talking about it more favorably.
The drafting of the data-retention proposal comes as Republicans are trying to do more to please their conservative supporters before the November election. One bill announced last week targets MySpace.com and other social networking sites. At a meeting last weekend, social conservatives called on the Bush administration to step up action against pornography, according to a New York Times report.
Sensenbrenner’s proposal is likely to be controversial. It would substantially alter U.S. laws dealing with privacy protection of Americans’ Web surfing habits and is sure to alarm Internet businesses that could be at risk for linking to illicit Web sites.
A spokesman for the House Judiciary Committee said the aide who drafted the legislation was not immediately available for an interview on Monday.
U.S. Justice Department spokesman Drew Wade said the agency generally doesn’t comment on legislation, though it may “issue a letter of opinion” at a later date.
Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, called Sensenbrenner’s measure an “open-ended obligation to collect information about all customers for all purposes. It opens the door to government fishing expeditions and unbounded data mining.”
The National Security Agency has engaged in extensive data-mining about Americans’ phone calling habits, USA Today reported last week, a revelation that could complicate Republicans’ efforts to enact laws relating to mandatory data retention and data mining. Sen. John Sununu, a New Hampshire Republican, for instance, took a swipe at the program on Monday, and Democrats have been calling for a formal investigation.
Worries for Internet providers
One unusual aspect of Sensenbrenner’s legislation–called the Internet Stopping Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Today’s Youth Act–or Internet Safety Act–is that it’s relatively vague.
Instead of describing exactly what information Internet providers would be required to retain about their users, the Internet Safety Act gives the attorney general broad discretion in drafting regulations. At minimum, the proposal says, user names, physical addresses, Internet Protocol addresses and subscribers’ phone numbers must be retained.
That generous wording could permit Gonzales to order Internet providers to retain records of e-mail orrespondents, Web pages visited, and even the contents of communications.
“In the absence of clear privacy safeguards, Congress would be wise to remove this provision,” Rotenberg said.
Sonia Arrison, director of technology studies at the free-market Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco, said the Internet Safety Act “follows in a long line of bad laws that are written in the name of protecting children.”
Complicating the outlook for the Internet Safety Act is the uncertain political terrain of Capitol Hill. Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, announced legislation (click for PDF) last month–which could be appended to a telecommunications bill–that would require Internet providers to store records that would permit police to identify each user.
The head of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, has expressed support for DeGette’s plan. That could lead to a renewal of a turf battle between the two committees, one of which has jurisdiction over Internet providers, while the other is responsible for federal criminal law.
“We’re still evaluating things,” said Terry Lane, a spokesman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “We haven’t really laid out exactly yet what kind of proposals we would support and what kind of proposals would be necessary.”
New Internet felonies proposed
Following are excerpts from Rep. Sensenbrenner’s Internet Safety Act:
“Whoever, being an Internet content hosting provider or email service provider, knowingly engages in any conduct the provider knows or has reason to believe facilitates access to, or the possession of, child pornography shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
“‘Internet content hosting provider’ means a service that (A) stores, through electromagnetic or other means, electronic data, including the content of web pages, electronic mail, documents, images, audio and video files, online discussion boards, and weblogs; and (B) makes such data available via the Internet”
“Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Attorney General shall issue regulations governing the retention of records by Internet Service Providers. Such regulations shall, at a minimum, require retention of records, such as the name and address of the subscriber or registered user (and what) user identification or telephone number was assigned…”
Federal politicians also are being lobbied by state law enforcement agencies, which say strict data retention laws will help them investigate crimes that have taken place a while ago.
Sgt. Frank Kardasz, head of Arizona’s Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, surveyed his colleagues in other states earlier this year asking them what new law would help them do their jobs. “The most frequent response involved data retention by Internet service providers,” or ISPs, Kardasz told News.com last month.
“Preservation” vs. “Retention”
At the moment, ISPs typically discard any log file that’s no longer required for business reasons such as network monitoring, fraud prevention or billing disputes. Companies do, however, alter that general rule when contacted by police performing an investigation–a practice called data preservation.
A 1996 federal law called the Electronic Communication Transactional Records Act regulates data preservation. It requires Internet providers to retain any “record” in their possession for 90 days “upon the request of a governmental entity.”
Because Internet addresses remain a relatively scarce commodity, ISPs tend to allocate them to customers from a pool based on whether a computer is in use at the time. (Two standard techniques used are the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol and Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet.)
In addition, ISPs are required by another federal law to report child pornography sightings to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which is in turn charged with forwarding that report to the appropriate police agency.
When adopting its data retention rules, the European Parliament approved U.K.-backed requirements saying that communications providers in its 25 member countries–several of which had enacted their own data retention laws already–must retain customer data for a minimum of six months and a maximum of two years.
The Europe-wide requirement applies to a wide variety of “traffic” and “location” data, including the identities of the customers’ correspondents; the date, time and duration of phone calls, voice over Internet Protocol calls, or e-mail messages; and the location of the device used for the communications. But the “content” of the communications is not supposed to be retained. The rules are expected to take effect in 2008.
According to a memo accompanying the proposed rules (click here for PDF), European politicians approved the rules because not all operators of Internet and communications services were storing information about citizens’ activities to the extent necessary for law enforcement and national security.
In addition to mandating data retention for ISPs and liability for Web site operators, Sensenbrenner’s Internet Safety Act also would:
• Make it a crime for financial institutions to “facilitate access” to child pornography, for instance by processing credit card payments.
• Increase penalties for registered sex offenders who commit another felony involving a child.
• Create an Office on Sexual Violence and Crimes against Children inside the Justice Department.
Retrieved June 24, 2006 from http://news.com.com/2102-1028_3-6072601.html?tag=st.util.print
Permalink
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 05:21 by Administrator
February 27, 2006
Offender: Jerry Dean Huff, a.k.a. “HollywoodASU992000″ age 35. Occupation: Engineer
On April 12, 2005, Jerry D. Huff, a 35 year old married engineer for a major computer chip manufacturer, was arrested and charged with luring a minor for sexual exploitation. The arrest occurred in the parking lot of a business in west Phoenix. Huff came to the attention of law enforcement in April 2005, when he used the Internet to solicit sex acts with a minor. During Internet chat conversations, Huff arranged the illicit tryst.
While using the screen name: “HollywoodASU992000” he made sexually explicit statements including (expletives deleted):
“You like to talk dirty?”
“You like older guys?”
“Do you have boobs yet?”
“Do you like to touch them?”
“Do you like talking sexy?”
“I’d like you to take your hand and put it between my legs and feel (deleted).”
“My (deleted) is hard now.”
“Im not talking about cyber, Im talking about getting together for real.”
“Would you like to (j___) me off today?”
“Would you let me lick your (n______)?”
“Do you know what a (b___ j__) is?”
“Where should I meet you?”
“You’re not going to get me in trouble are you?”
“You know we shouldnt do this right?”
“It’ll be our secret?”
“Because I could get in a lot of trouble for this.”
“See you in an hour — gotta go finish getting ready.”
Huff drove his Mitsubishi Diamante 27 miles from Mesa to west Phoenix, intent upon meeting a minor for sex. Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force members arrested him without incident and he made admissions about the crime. A search warrant was served at his residence and evidence was seized.
On February 27, 2006, Huff waived his right to trial and plead guilty before Judge Andrew G. Klein of the Maricopa County Superior Court in Arizona. Judge Klein sentenced Huff to 8 years probation and a suspended jail sentence. If he violates probation he could serve six months jail – on work furlough.
Huff must register as a sex offender and he is restricted from using computers in his home without the prior written permission of his probation officer.
Permalink
Posted in Internet crimes against children at 05:20 by Administrator
August 8, 2006
Dr. Frank Kardasz:
I was honored to be invited to address a group of law enforcement officers and prosecutors at a seminar sponsored by the National Law Center for Children and Families in Phoenix.
Here is my speech.
——————————————————————————————
Thank you for inviting me today. The AZ ICAC Task Force is one of 46 similar groups across the country, covering every state. Within AZ we have 44 memorandums of understanding with law enforcement agencies across the state and we will try to assist you with your needs when it comes to cases involving child pornography, luring and community and employee education.
I reviewed the list of subjects that you are learning about during this conference and I saw child pornography, online enticement and obscenity on the agenda. I never had a real appreciation for the importance of those subjects until I first began working in the field six years ago. Like a lot of cops I once had the attitude that I could never work these kinds of crimes and that the criminals who violate against children are the scum of the earth. And while my low opinion of the criminals and the defense attorneys who represent them has not changed, I now have a much higher appreciation of you men and women in law enforcement who investigate and prosecute these difficult crimes.
This type of law enforcement work is still in its infancy. Computers still scare some old-school cops and lawyers. Some seventh graders have more computer skills than we do. So we are constantly trying to catch up. Getting our law enforcement arms around the growing problem of Internet crime is a monumental task. By way of analogy, some days I feel like we are trying to restrain King Kong with a tiny rubber band.
The Internet provides an unparalleled opportunity for criminals to unearth themselves and victimize unsuspecting young people. Research indicates that of the estimated 24 million child Internet users, one in five may have received a unwanted sexual solicitation, but only one in four told a parent.
Curious and innocent youngsters are flocking to the Internet seeking friendship and information but are instead finding sexual deviants and predators. My undercover investigators and I have witnessed no shortage of adults chatting on the Internet with the stated intention of sexually victimizing minors.
There are systemic challenges. Law enforcement resources are often absorbed by those crimes for which there is a public outcry. Overall, there is less of a public outcry for the enforcement of Internet crimes against children than there is for many other crimes. In recent years Federal resources are drawn to terrorism, drug enforcement and border control, all of which have nationwide importance. Local resources are drawn to homicides, sex assaults, gangs, drugs, burglaries, and other offenses of great local importance. Consequently, we who fight Internet crime are often understaffed.
Unlike spectacular crimes and events involving crashes, explosions, shootings and widespread newsworthy bloodletting, the evil crimes against children are committed in dark and private places by offenders who often psychologically control or humiliate their victims into silence. In cases involving predators who use social networking sites, the psychological grooming and control process begins with the offenders carefully constructed web page. They may pose as harmless friendly adults and mentors, or as other children of the same age, or they may just anonymously browse and search and stalk the millions of web pages for hours on end until they find just the right target and gather just enough information to permit them to locate and capture a victim.
I am of the opinion that the quiet crimes committed when an adult sexual predator meets a curious unsupervised teen to engage in sex acts are usually unreported. Often, I suspect, the teen returns without his or her parents ever finding out. We learned of one such case in Arizona when an undercover officer from my task force arrested a predator and learned that the offender had met several actual minors who he had victimized and to whom he had given sexually transmitted diseases. In their shame, the girls had never notified their parents of the crimes. The distraught parents only learned of the offenses when my detectives informed them of the suspects confessions.
We must keep working to protect curious but innocent teens from the predators who quietly entice them. In many cases, the teens who are lured by sexual predators will never come forward due to fear or a misplaced sense of guilt. A few of them, like 13 year old Kasie Woody of Arkansas, and 13 year old Christina Long of Connecticut, were forever silenced by Internet sexual predators who lured them, sexually victimized them and killed them.
Some will say, its not that big a problem, the crime statistics are not large. And that will seem to be true because these crimes are underreported. Defenders of free speech and privacy will demand numbers and statistics to justify change. How many incidents? How many sexual assaults? How many children? How many deaths?
But you have to ask yourselves, what is an acceptable number of children lost to Internet sexual predators and child pornography traffickers? For me, the answer is none.
These are not easy investigations to work. Sometimes the child pornography we see is so devastatingly surreal that we cannot wrap our logical minds around the possibility that anyone would do such things to a child.
Some of the most hardened and cynical cops I know cannot work Internet crimes against children because they cannot endure the attendant emotional hardship that comes with witnessing the inhumane suffering of innocent children.
Child Pornography
I want to talk a little about child pornography and tell you welcome to Arizona where the mandatory minimum sentencing range for one single image of child pornography is from 10-24 years prison. Probably the toughest sentencing in the country.
One of our AZ ICAC investigations involved an Schoolteacher named Morton Berger. I testified at his trial which was prosecuted by the Maricopa County Attorneys Office. Berger was found guilty and appealed his 200 year child pornography sentence based on arguments of equal protection under the law and cruel and unusual punishment. Attorneys from the Arizona Attorney Generals Office argued the states case.
I want to read some of the comments of Arizona appellate court Justices Susan Ehrlich and Philip Hall that I have taken from the opinion of the court:
It is evident beyond the need for elaboration that a State’s interest in safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor is compelling.
…the possession of child pornography inflames the desires of child molesters, pedophiles and child pornographers.
The State has more than a passing interest in forestalling the damage caused by child pornography: preventing harm to children is one of its most important interests.
…we cannot fault the State for attempting to stamp out this vice at all levels in the distribution chain.
(Morton) Berger downloaded images from the Internet, and every time he visited a website, he demonstrated to the producers and sellers of child pornography that there was a demand for their product. Berger’s demand served to drive the industry.
About the images, the justices said,
…the victimization of a child continues when (a sexual act) is memorialized in an image. The materials produced are a permanent record of the children’s participation and the harm to the child is exacerbated by their circulation. The victimization of the children involved does not end when the pornographer’s camera is put away.
And about the argument that a mere possessor of child pornography is no danger the justices said,
…the possession of child pornography drives that industry and…the production of child pornography will decrease if those who possess the product are punished equally with those who produce it.
Berger maintains also that, because his possession of the pornographic images was passive and because he did not use threats or violence in the commission of his crimes, his sentence is grossly disproportionate. This logic is abstruse. Child pornography is a form of child abuse.
The materials produced are a permanent record of the children’s participation and the harm to the child is exacerbated by their circulation.
I am pleased to report that Berger’s conviction was affirmed by Arizona Court of Appeals. Morton Berger is scheduled for release in the year 2175. His name now appears at the state sponsored web site at www.azcorrections.gov
Frustration
Those of you who have worked on these kinds of crimes know them to be the most frustrating and most rewarding investigations and prosecutions that you can work.
Frustrating on several levels. Frustrating because of the fierce competition we have within our own agencies for the resources to investigate and prosecute these crimes.
Frustrating because the horrors of child pornography are summarily dismissed by some who perceive the images as “just pictures” and unworthy of investigation.
Frustrating because online enticement and Internet related child pornography crimes continue to increase exponentially while our resources dedicated to stopping them do not.
Rewards
Now I know you didn’t come here to hear me snivel and whine all afternoon about our frustrations so let me tell you about the rewards part of our job. For a cop, the best reward after the hunt is the catch. Getting one of these predators in custody and off the computer is a good thing. And for a prosecutor, I know that closing a file with a predator ending in prison brings a great sense of relief and accomplishment.
Prevention Challenge
One of our greatest challenges is to “harden the target”, make it tougher for predators to get to the kids by making kids and parents smarter.
When I talk to parents I tell them that if they use the Internet as a babysitter they are placing their child at risk. By analogy, think of the Internet like a big city street. Imagine that you are walking down the street with your child. On one side of the street are libraries, games, legitimate, businesses and kind friendly people. On the other side of the street are illegal enterprises, child molesters, identity thieves, pornographers and bullies. Would you let your child tour that street alone? Probably not! If you fail to closely supervise your child’s Internet use, his or her natural curiosity and lack of street smarts may take them to that wrong side of the Internet stupid-highway.
Through the years I have been tasked with giving community presentations about Internet crime prevention to many groups of children and adults. At the end of several such presentations I have been approached and thanked by people who then take me aside and quietly confide in me that they were once victims and they then express their very sincere thanks for the work that we do investigating and prosecuting these cases. These are adults who have never reported their victimization and never will because they do not wish to relive the horror. Those thanks from those victims are the best reward. And it is my thoughts of those victims that keep me coming to work every day.
In Conclusion
I want to leave you with this: Please remember that our little victims, the children who you represent, cannot pick up a phone to dial 911 the way many other victims can. They cannot adjust agency manpower, set policy or change regulations for their cause. They cannot call their local elected official. They cannot form a citizen-action group and they cannot vote. All they can do is suffer and hope. Hope that people like you will pick up their cause, and summon the sustained resolve to overcome systemic, societal and psychological hurdles to help them. Its up to you to protect a child’s right to grow up happy and innocent.
Please remember, the work that you do is appreciated more than you will ever know. It is appreciated by those victims who you represent who will never come forward, and it is for them that you must continue to labor towards bringing sexual predators and traffickers of child pornography to justice.
Permalink
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
