SexCrimeDefender

Four Stages of Sexual Pedators

From the U.S. Department of Justice's pamphlet:

Use of Computers in the Sexual Exploitation of Children

Child predators—sexual offenders who act on their sexual interest directed toward children—come from all economic and social backgrounds. Other terms used for these offenders
include “pedophile” and “preferential sex offender.” However,
these terms have specific clinical definitions. This guide uses the
term “child predator” because it is a nonclinical term that anyone
can testify to in court.  Experience gained through hundreds of investigations and interviews shows that the behavior of child predators usually develops in four stages:

✹ Awareness. An individual first comes to realize that he has a
sexual interest in children. This interest may manifest itself in
several ways. Usually, the individual gathers as much information
as possible on the subject in an attempt to understand
his feelings. In this early stage, the Internet provides access
both to a variety of information sources—newspaper articles,
newscasts, groups such as the North American Man/Boy Love
Association (NAMBLA)—and to online chats with other individuals
who may have similar interests.

✹ Fantasy. The individual uses the research that he has collected
as a source for sexual fantasizing and stimulation. Eventually,
the fantasy becomes more fixated, with an emphasis on child
pornography. An individual using a computer will exchange email
with others who share the same interests and save these
messages and all other related material using some type of
computer storage medium.

✹ Stalking. Fantasy is no longer enough, and the individual
is now compelled to seek closeness to actual children. The
child predator will loiter at athletic events, parks, playgrounds,
school bus stops, and other locations where children are found
and may seek positions of trust in order to have access to children.
Hardcore child pornography plays an important role at
this stage. An individual using a computer will progress from
online chats with others with the same interests to chats with
potential victims. He may send them photos of himself in sexual
poses and request similar sexual photos in return.

✹ Molestation. The individual molests a child. The predator
using a computer sets up a meeting with the child he has
been corresponding with. Depending on the predator, the
meeting may lead either to a seduction or to abduction of the
child. 

. . .

However, be aware that an individual child predator may demonstrate all, some, or even none of these behaviors. Lack of evidence of the sequence of behaviors described above does not in itself clear a suspect.

Inside the Mind

From CrimPsychBlog:

Increasing Honest Responding on Cognitive Distortions in Child Molesters: The Bogus Pipeline Revisited

An article in the March 2007 issue of Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment presents the results of an experimental comparison between child molesters’ responses on a questionnaire and their responses when attached to a fake lie detector known as a ‘bogus pipeline’.

. . .

Forensic psychologists who try to understand paedophiles, or, as the authors here describe them, ‘child molesters’ (abbreviated to ‘CMs’), are interested in cognitive disortions (distorted thought patterns) because it has been suggested that distorted thinking allows CMs to justify their behaviour to themselves. The sort of distorted thinking we’re talking about involves endorsement of statements such as “if an adult has sex with a child who enjoys it and seems to want it, it should not be considered a crime” or “children are not as innocent as most people think” (taken from Gannon, 2006, p.364). One of the ‘treatments’ for CMs, cognitive behavioural therapy, involves helping CMs to identify cognitive distortions and to recognise them as distortions, in the hope that this will help them control their offending in future (Gannon, 2006).

Let’s assume that CMs do indeed hold cognitive disortions about child-adult relationships, and that making CMs accept that these are not normal or healthy beliefs is key to useful treatment (note that this assumption is fairly controversial, but we haven’t the space to go into that debate here). The first step in treatment is, therefore, eliciting a CM’s beliefs about sex with children, but this is not as easy as you might think. It can often be difficult to measure true cognitive distortions in CMs. Why? Well, when any of us are asked about our attitudes or thoughts about something embarrassing or socially undesirable we have a tendency to massage the truth a little to make ourselves look better. Gannon et al. (2007) hypothesised that CMs do the same when asked about their thoughts about children.

So how can you persuade someone to reveal socially undesirable attitudes or beliefs? Enter the bogus pipeline (BPL), devised in 1971 by Edward Jones and Harold Sigall (’pipeline’ as in ‘pipeline to your innermost thoughts’; ‘bogus’ as in fake). These researchers were initially somewhat tentative about how the BPL procedure worked and concluded that “for whatever reason or reasons, subjects attached to the bogus device appear much more ready to express negative affect in experimental settings where one might normally expect the inhibition of such feelings” (p.349). However, in their meta-analytic review of BPL research, published in 1993, Neal Roese and David Jamieson concluded that, despite criticisms, “the BPL effect reflects the valid operation of the procedure to reduce socially desirable responding” (p. 372).

This seems to have been what happened with Gannon et al.’s study. Their results indicated that when CMs were attached to a fake lie detector, they responded with increased endorsements of cognitive disortion items (such as those I mentioned earlier) compared to when they were not subjected to the BPL procedure. Thus, Gannon et al. argue:

Our results suggest that CMs consciously minimize both the extent to which they hold offense-justifying beliefs and the extent to which they engage in socially disapproved of behaviors (p.18).

This has particular contemporary resonance because sex offenders are now being polygraphed as part of their treatment in the UK. However, as we’ve pointed out before in the Deception Blog, the effectiveness of polygraphy with sex offenders is probably more about ‘truth facilitation’ than ‘lie detection’. One possibility is that the polygraph acts as a kind of ‘bogus pipeline’, facilitating the disclosure of socially undesirable responses…

Psychological Study of Sexual Harassment

Via Psychology and Crime News, this study (available for a fee) caught my eye.  I don't really get involved in civil employment/sexual harassment law that much, but this is on topic, interesting and may generate some insights after I think about it awhile.

In 3 studies, the author tested 2 competing views of sexual harassment: (a) It is motivated primarily by sexual desire and, therefore, is directed at women who meet feminine ideals, and (b) it is motivated primarily by a desire to punish gender-role deviants and, therefore, is directed at women who violate feminine ideals. Study 1 included male and female college students (N = 175) and showed that women with relatively masculine personalities (e.g., assertive, dominant, and independent) experienced the most sexual harassment. Study 2 (N = 134) showed that this effect was not because women with relatively masculine personalities were more likely than others to negatively evaluate potentially harassing scenarios. Study 3 included male and female employees at 5 organizations (N = 238) and showed that women in male-dominated organizations were harassed more than women in female-dominated organizations, and that women in male-dominated organizations who had relatively masculine personalities were sexually harassed the most.

Prof. Lyons Gives Some Useful Cross-Examination Tips

I first noticed word of this study on CrimProfLog.  The study, published in the February issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry is described by Thomas Lyon, a professor of law and psychology at USC who co-authored the study.  Although my review of Prof. Lyons's publically available material indicates that he may approach his research with a certain predisposed attitude toward the prosecution, his research does contain some helpful hints (in bold) for the defense.

“Some researchers have begun to question the assumption made by clinicians and others who work with sexually abused children that children are reluctant to disclose abuse,” said Lyon. “This study supports the classical view - even when children overcome barriers to disclosure, they are still susceptible to pressures.” The researchers did not find any evidence to support the belief that retraction is a sign that the original allegations were false. Lyon explained: “If inconsistencies mean the child really wasn’t abused, then one should see a relation between inconsistency and other evidence of abuse. We didn’t see any such pattern.” The study has important implications for how cases of sexual abuse are investigated and prosecuted. “When a child is at high risk of reversal,“ suggested Lyon, “investigators should carefully document the child’s first interview. Videotaping can preserve the child’s story. It might even reduce the likelihood that the child will be pressured by others.” The results cast new light on doubts raised in several recent high-profile sexual abuse cases about the credibility of child witnesses. For example, the alleged victim and his brother in the Michael Jackson case were impeached by the defense based on inconsistencies and the alleged victim’s initial reluctance to acknowledge that abuse occurred. “Perhaps they really were lying,” said Lyon, who notes that the young men did not suffer from an unsupportive parent. “But jurors should also be told how difficult it is for truly abused children to maintain their story.”

The study can be found for a fee here.

In the study, Friedman and fellow researcher Thomas Lyon, professor of law and psychology at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, working with a team of Oberlin undergraduates, conducted two in-class demonstrations with 86 Oberlin schoolchildren between the ages of 4 and 13 shortly before and after Halloween. Three months later, the children were asked to recall the content of the demonstrations and when they occurred.

Friedman and Lyon discovered that no matter what their ages, the children had difficulty remembering that Halloween was near the demonstration date. They also couldn’t remember whether the demonstrations had happened before or after the holiday, although they could remember other details very well. Findings from the study were published in the November/ December 2005 issue of Child Development.

The study also showed that open-ended questions, such as “Tell me everything you remember about that day,” almost never produced information related to the time of the event. At the same time, focused questions like “What season was it?” led to lots of inaccurate answers. This, says Friedman, demonstrates a need for future research on what kinds of questions elicit the most accurate information while minimizing the amount of inaccurate information.

Thomas Lyon's Resume is here.

Link Between Sex Offenses & Religiousity

Via CrimPsychBlog:

Eric Schwitzgebel, Associate Professor of Philosophy at University of California at Riverside and author of The Splintered Mind blog, commented last month on research on the links between religiosity and sexual offending behaviour.

As he explains, the researchers analysed the criminal records and self-reported religious affiliations of 111 male sexual offenders in prison in Australia:

[The analysis] indicated that […] those who maintained religious involvement from childhood to adulthood had more sexual offense convictions, more victims, and younger victims, than other groups. Results challenge assumptions that religious involvement should, as with other crimes, serve to deter sexual offending behavior.

CrimPsychBlog

A new discovery to me is CrimPsychBlog.  My hotlink is to his sex crimes section. As so much of the practice of criminal law as it pertains to sex crimes is wrapped up in psychology, I am pleased to see a comprehensive resource on the issue.

New Studies on Treatment and Recidivism

Corrections Sentencing points the way and has some extensive abstracts of some newly released studies on sex offender recidivism and treatment:

• Understanding Treatment for Adults and Juveniles Who Have Committed Sex Offenses
  • Crime & Consequences Takes a critical view of sex offender rehab referenced in this study.
• Controlling Sex Offender Reentry: Jessica's Law Measures in California
• Sexual Addiction in Incarcerated Sexual Offenders (cost)

• Implementing Evidence-Based Practice in Community Corrections: The Principles of Effective Intervention

The Lie Detectors: The History of an American Obsession

I haven’t had a chance to read this yet myself but the review makes the book look interesting for anyone with an interest in law enforcement issues.  I myself am deeply skeptical of relying on a polygraph for anything having had some bad client experiences with them.

From the New York Times

Amazingly the lie detector, largely spurned by the rest of the world, lives on in the United States although new technologies have appeared on the horizon: machines that measure minute changes in facial expression, vocal pitch or heat around the eyes. None of them, Mr. Alder notes, address a central problem pointed out by Montaigne four centuries ago, the inconvenient fact that “the reverse side of the truth has a hundred thousand shapes and no defined limits.”