by Dr. Frank Kardasz, November 9, 2007

The arrest of another sex offender for Internet child pornography at a public library highlights the need for continued vigilance against this disturbing form of child abuse. While the Internet is an unprecedented source of worthwhile educational information, it is also the preferred venue of many sociopaths, thieves, fraudsters, bullies and sex offenders. Free public access to computers at libraries provide criminals with the means and mechanisms to facilitate their crimes.

Sometimes when I speak with community groups and describe the surprising number of crimes being facilitated via the Internet someone asks, "Why don't they just shut the whole thing down!" - as if a switch exists somewhere that will simply cut the power to the entire Internet. Although the Internet is with us to stay, I doubt that the framers of our constitution could have envisioned child pornography being accessed through computers at our tax-supported public libraries. In Minneapolis, the problem with people viewing all forms of pornography on library computers became so disturbing that in 2000, librarians there filed a hostile work environment lawsuit against the city and won a large settlement. (see http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1063212018621)

Some free speech advocates have tried to inhibit the use of Internet filters on public library computers. The argument about whether or not an individual has the right to view adult pornography on a public library computer has been decided by the Supreme Court. In 2003 the Court ruled against the American Library Association and pornography producers by authorizing filtering of pornography from public library computers. Justice Stevens said, "The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree." In his concurring opinion, the late Justice Rehnquist cited an expert who said, "The librarian's responsibility...is to separate out the gold from the garbage, not to preserve everything." (see http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-361.ZC.html)

The law classifies child pornography differently from pornography depicting adults. Child pornography is unlawful everywhere but its potential for harm is sometimes underestimated. Apologists for the possessors of child pornography argue that the images are "only pictures" and that looking at images is acceptable and preferable to molesting a child. Such ridiculous rationalization was best refuted by Canadian Michael Brier, a viewer of Internet child pornography who murdered 10 year old Holly Jones in Toronto. He confessed that viewing the images made him "long for it" (the sex act) "in his heart." (see http://www.independent-bangladesh.com/news/dec/31/31122004wo.htm)

In one Arizona appellate case (State of Arizona v. Morton Robert Berger, 2004) the defendant argued that because his possession of child pornography was passive and because he did not use violence, his long prison sentence was unfair. Judges Ehrlich and Hall of the Arizona Court of Appeals disagreed. They said that such logic is abstruse and cited other courts that have decided that child pornography is a form of child abuse. According to the courts, possessors of child pornography support the child pornography industry and thus support the subordination of children. The court in Berger also said that consumers of child pornography provide an economic motive for its creation and continuation; absent such encouragement and enablement, these children would not have been abused as they were. (see Haslett, 205, Ariz. at 527 P11, 73 P.3d at 1262)

Other apologists for possessors of child pornography argue that no proven link exists between those who view child pornography and those who commit "hands-on" contact offenses. This argument was refuted when a study of prisoners in Federal custody for possession of child pornography found that a significant number had committed previously unreported acts of contact sex offenses against minors. (see http://www.kardasz.org/HernandezPrisonStudy.pdf)

Meanwhile the troubles involving offenders viewing child pornography in libraries continue. In 2004, a Pennsylvania man raped and choked an eight year old girl in a public library restroom after viewing pornography on the computers there. (see http://citypaper.net/articles/2004-04-08/cb.shtml) Other similar incidents throughout the United States have caused some library administrators to take notice.

While some libraries have taken affirmative steps towards protecting patrons from both adult pornography and child pornography, more work is needed. Investigators need additional tools to assist them in stopping child pornography in public libraries. I recommend the following additional steps to further improve library safety and assist law enforcement officers investigating child pornography incidents:

1. Those who use public library computers should be required to provide and enter identification information, if only a library card number, before being permitted to use the computers. The library card number should be preserved on the library computer servers for 90 days so that in the event of a crime investigators could obtain a subpoena and retrieve the information.

2. Computer software that filters pornography must be actively and carefully monitored in order to keep computers safe.

3. Libraries should adjust their computer server logs to capture information about all Internet (URL) locations visited by each computer, and retain the information for at least 90 days. The captured information would not be revealed to anyone without the appropriate court order.

4. Libraries should retain information about the library materials checked out and later returned by patrons for a period of 90 days after the items are returned. This information would not be accessible without the appropriate court order.

5. Libraries must acknowledge that library computers become Internet service providers as defined in Federal law and subject to the provisions of law that requires them to report child pornography when it is discovered on computers. (see http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002510----000-.html)

6. Surveillance video collected in public areas of libraries is public information. Persons whose images are recorded at the library are not in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Copies of such videos should be provided to law enforcement officers upon request and without requiring a court order.

7. Those who use information from a stolen or fraudulently obtained library card in order to access Library computers should be investigated. The Arizona law against computer tampering (ARS 13-2316.A.8) makes the offense a class six felony. Other states have similar laws.

Implementing these recommendations will help make libraries safer for citizens and give law enforcement additional avenues for finding offenders when incidents occur.

I can be contacted by e-mail at kardasz@kardasz.org

Posted by Dr. Kardasz at 01:58 AM | Permalink

By Tiara M. Ellis / The Dallas Morning News. 06/06/07

Collin County prosecutors say they dropped charges in 23 sex-predator cases stemming from stings in Murphy because they couldn't prove crimes were committed here. Part of the problem, they say, was a lack of cooperation from the Internet watchdog group that set up the stings.

That group, Perverted Justice, has fired back on its Web site, calling the prosecutors liars trying to deflect blame for the dropped cases.

Perverted Justice worked with Murphy police and the television show NBC Dateline last year to lure alleged sexual predators to a house in Murphy. They used a chat room decoy pretending to be a teenage boy or girl.

Last week, Collin County First Assistant District Attorney Greg Davis announced his office would not prosecute the cases, calling the evidence insufficient. He declined to comment further, citing an office policy.But queries from the public prompted him to write an e-mail this week giving a more detailed explanation.

"In many cases, we found that we had no legal jurisdiction to prosecute because legally the crime occurred outside Collin County," he wrote. "In many cases, we could not prosecute because Perverted Justice refused to answer our questions, refused to participate as witnesses, or refused
to turn over potential evidence."

He went on to say, "... We advised all concerned that we were in the law enforcement business - not show business."

Perverted Justice founder Xavier Von Erck sharply criticized Mr. Davis and his office in a lengthy Web posting.

He said members of his group were never asked for more evidence or to be witnesses. If they had been, he said, they would have cooperated completely.

"We've gone from questioning the competency of the Collin County prosecutor's office to questioning their sanity," said Mr. Von Erck, who describes himself as a 27-year-old from Portland, Ore.

Perverted Justice became involved at the invitation of Murphy Police Chief Bill Myrick and City Manager Craig Sherwood, neither of whom could be reached for comment this week. A scheduled interview was canceled.

For the Murphy sting, Perverted Justice volunteers spent weeks going into chat rooms pretending to be 13- and 14-year-olds. They waited for men to contact them, chatted online, then let Murphy police review the conversations, Mr. Von Erck said.

Mr. Von Erck said the Murphy house was used only after police said there was sufficient evidence.

Texas law does not require a meeting to take place for a crime to occur.

For the charge of online solicitation of a minor, the Internet chat is enough.

But to prosecute the cases in Collin County, Mr. Davis said in an interview Wednesday, the suspect or intended victim must be using a computer in the county or the Internet discussion must have run through a server in the county.

"If none of those are present that communication did not occur here and we can't prosecute even with a confession. They can confess here, but if a crime didn't happen here," Mr. Davis said. "In the majority of these cases that was the case."

Mr. Von Erck said in response to an e-mailed question that some of the Perverted Justice volunteers were in Collin County conducting chats, along with others doing the same in other parts of the country. But the group's server that recorded the chats was in Collin County, he said.

Mr. Davis said jurisdiction was only part of the problem. Perverted Justice volunteers hindered any further investigation by not cooperating, he said.

Mr. Von Erck said his volunteers received one phone call asking whether they had a contract with Murphy police and requesting a copy of the contract between Perverted Justice and NBC Dateline.

As proof of his group's value and its methods, he pointed to nearly 200convictions since the creation of the Web site in 2004.

California's Riverside County Sheriff's Department and districtattorney's office worked with Perverted Justice and NBC Dateline in 2006. They made 51 arrests, according to news reports and the PervertedJustice Web site.

He said that while Perverted Justice was helpful, his office "relied onthe sheriff's investigation and case preparation for the filing of criminal cases."

"A lot of people blur the lines because they think of informants orneighborhood watch groups. But you rely on them to provide you withinformation, not to do the investigations.

Before the Murphy operation, a Collin County prosecutor sent a letter toChief Myrick saying the district attorney's office would not take partin the planning or execution of the sting, but would "vigorously"prosecute any solid cases.

"I did not like the way the integrity of our prosecutors was beingattacked," he said. "I just did not want to let that go unchallenged,because I knew we had acted in full integrity."

Posted by Dr. Kardasz at 12:55 AM | Permalink

Dr. Frank Kardasz: Misconduct, ethics violations and crimes by public officials often lead us to ask; What was he (or she) thinking?  If the violators had used some logical decision-making processes beforehand, perhaps the ethics violations would not have occurred.  Here is a link to a hand list of decision making process: http://www.kardasz.org/Decision_Making_Tools.html

------------------------------------------

California Judges Censured in Connection With DUI Cases

Pam Smith, The Recorder, 06-12-2006

Two Superior Court judges, both accused of driving under the influence and then trying to leverage their positions as judges to get special treatment, were censured by California's Commission on Judicial Performance Thursday.

Sonoma County Judge Elaine Rushing and Riverside County Judge Bernard Schwartz each avoided the possibility of a stiffer consequence -- removal from the bench -- by stipulating to the disciplinary charges against them.

Rushing was driving under the influence last June when she hit a residential wall in Santa Rosa and left the scene without telling the property owners, according to the decision in her case. About two miles down the road, she drove her car into a ditch.

When emergency personnel and highway patrol officers reached the scene, Rushing denied she had been the driver, making up a story about a man and a woman who had been with her but had left on foot. She also repeatedly told an officer that she was a Superior Court judge, and kept asking him to call her husband who, she informed him, was an appellate court justice.

Rushing -- who currently presides over civil matters -- told the officer he should not be arresting her because she was a judge, according to the decision.

Rushing's overall conduct here was "seriously at odds" with canons of ethics, as well as expected judicial behavior, the decision said, which was approved by seven commission members. But the commission also noted that Rushing had no prior discipline on her record and that "numerous people" had submitted letters supporting her. They included criminal defense attorney Cristina Arguedas and 4th District Court of Appeal Justice Eileen Moore.

Two other commission members had voted against the settlement, based on a belief that there should be a hearing to develop a full factual record before reaching any decision, commission Chairperson Marshall Grossman wrote.

Rushing's attorney, James Murphy, who works in the San Francisco office of Murphy, Pearson, Bradley & Feeney, said the judge doesn't recall the events that occurred. "We entered into the stipulation," he said, "because Judge Rushing wanted to resolve this matter. It has been very distracting to her." Rushing pleaded no contest last year to driving under the influence.

Schwartz, who has been on the bench in Riverside County since 2003, was pulled over by a Pismo Beach cop in July 2005 for veering out of his traffic lane, according to Schwartz's stipulation with the commission. When the officer asked him to take a test to screen for alcohol, Schwartz suggested the officer run his license. When the officer asked Schwartz if he was trying to say he was a police officer, he responded, "No, I'm a judge," the stipulation said.

Shortly after, the conversations were tape recorded, the stipulation said. On one of the multiple occasions when Schwartz suggested the officers just take him to his hotel and was refused, he said, "But, I'm all of a mile away from the hotel. ... I know you guys are doing your job, but this is not good for me. I'm running for election next year and this is not a good time."

As with Rushing, the commission decided that Schwartz had committed prejudicial, rather than willful, misconduct, because he was not acting in a judicial capacity when he attempted to get preferential treatment. He also had no prior discipline, Grossman wrote in the undisputed decision.

Retrieved June 11, 2006 from, http://www.law.com/jsp/law/LawArticleFriendly.jsp?id=1149843918528

Posted by Dr. Kardasz at 12:52 AM | Permalink

Testimony of Dr. Frank Kardasz, Sergeant / Project Director

from the
Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force

for the
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

“Sexual Exploitation of Children over the Internet: What Parents, Kids and Congress need to Know about Child Predators"

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for permitting me to speak today. Arizona joined the Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force Program in 2000. We work cooperatively with our law enforcement colleagues from the FBI, ICE, Postal Inspection Service and the Secret Service. Although the names of our agencies differ, we all share the common goal of trying to keep children safe from Internet sexual predators and child pornographers.

The AZ ICAC Task Force has recorded over 2,000 investigations, with over 200 arrests. Although Arizona has the toughest laws in the nation against child pornography, this has not stopped the trafficking of unlawful images, and like all of our colleagues nationwide, we have many more solvable case files at the ready than we have personnel and resources to bring in the offenders. Sadly, while these cases await investigation, children and teens continue to suffer at the hands of sex offenders.

I have had the opportunity to speak with many citizen groups about Internet crime, and at the end of each presentation there is often some senior individual in the group who raises a hand and asks: "Why don't they just switch that whole dang Internet thing off!"...as if we have a control panel somewhere with a dial that we can turn and it will regulate Internet misconduct.

Legislation is the closest thing we have to an Internet control dial. Although opponents of controls argue that regulations are costly, imperfect and violations of constitutional freedoms, I sometimes wonder what the framers of the Constitution would have thought if they had known what we now know about computers and the Internet. Would they have permitted the Internet crimes against children that we are witnessing today?

I would like to talk about two things today: the threat from those predators who use social networking sites, and the legal help we need regarding data retention by Internet service providers. The luring of minors for sexual exploitation remains a continuing threat to our youth.

Beyond the chat rooms that predators have always frequented, social networking sites are now wildly popular. There are dozens of such free sites, including MySpace, Xanga, Friendster, Facebook, and others. Curious young people visit the sites every day and post images and personal information about themselves. They can browse and search for others according to age, sexual preference, zip code or school name. They can communicate with one another and then arrange to meet in person. And as you might imagine, the sites are also popular among sexual predators.

We received a phone call a few months ago from an Arizona woman who said that her young daughter, while using a social networking site, was contacted by a man from their neighborhood who was know to her as a registered sex offender. We found the mans web page where he described himself as a kindly lover of poetry, plants and flowers who was seeking female friendship for dating. Fourteen other young people were listed on his profile as friends with whom he had networked through the site. There was no mention on his profile that he is a high-risk registered sex offender in Arizona. Since that time the mans original web page is no longer available at the site, but there is nothing stopping him from re-subscribing to the same site or one of the many other sites under another assumed name.

The use of the sites by sexual predators remains a serious threat to the safety of our children. The problem will likely get worse before it gets better as kids flock to the sites and more communities, schools, libraries and businesses provide unrestricted Internet access through wireless access points that sometimes leave law enforcement investigations at a dead end. My written attachments contain some suggestions for improving the social networking site environment, but in the interest of saving time I do not wish to review them all now.

I would like to talk about an item of importance to my investigative colleagues nationwide. Last week I sent a survey to Internet crimes against children (ICAC) investigators at all of our nationwide affiliates throughout the United States.

The survey asked one question: What law could be created or revised to best assist the investigators who work cases involving Internet crimes against children?

The most frequent response involved data storage by Internet service providers and the retrieval of data from Internet service providers. What our people are telling us is that investigators need ISP's to retain subscriber and content information so that when legal process in the form of a subpoena or search warrant are served, there is data remaining with the ISP that will help the investigator find the offender.

Most ISP organizations are operated by conscientious and professional business people who are horrified by Internet crimes against children. Some ISP's have graciously extended themselves to help investigators. Some reluctant ISP's will only assist to the extent that the law mandates them to assist.

Mandating that ISP’s retain data is not a privacy violation. Law enforcement only needs the data preserved but not disclosed to us, except in response to legal process. Internet industry professionals may cite the financial burden of data storage, but consider the potential human cost of not retaining data. For example, when law enforcement is seeking a predator identifiable only by the information associated with his screen name, but the responsible ISP did not preserve the information, the investigation ends while the predator roams free. Based on the requests of my colleagues

I respectfully ask for two improvements to the law:

    1. That Internet service providers be mandated to retain information about subscribers for at least one year, with penalties for non-compliance.

    2. That Internet service providers be mandated to respond to subpoenas involving crimes against children investigations within one week of receiving a subpoena, and more quickly under exigent circumstances where a child is missing.

I will conclude by saying that investigators need your help in order to navigate those dark alleys of the Internet where they work diligently to help protect children. I recognize that turning the Internet control dial comes with a cost, but failing to turn the dial carries a greater human cost to our young people.

Thank you again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS TO THE TESTIMONY OF DR. KARDASZ

Internet Social Networking Sites

Recent disturbing incidents involving Internet crimes against children have been prominent in the media. In some incidents, the crimes have involved suspects and victims who met each other via Internet social networking sites. Social networking sites are places on the Internet where people can meet one another, communicate and interact. Social networking and communication are normal parts of the human experience.

The Internet has become an important venue for people to network and interact. Young people are naturally curious about themselves, about others, and about the world. The sites permit them to reach out to others from around the globe, sometimes with tragic results. There are many social networking sites. Some of them are listed below:

• Myspace.com • Facebook.com • Friendster.com • Dittytalk.com • Cozydating.com • Interracialsingles.net • Livejournal.com • Friendsfusion.com • Intellectconnect.com • Prisonpenpals.com • Zogo.com

Why are the sites popular?

Most of the social networking sites are free and supported by advertisers who hope users will buy products or services advertised on the sites. Young people who are curious and seeking relationships and new experiences visit the sites to find others.

How do the sites work?

Any computer with Internet access can be used to permit someone to join a site. Some sites require only that the registrant provide an email address and often there is no verification process to check the truthfulness of any of the information that a registrant provides. Most sites require that users abide by conditions and terms of use meant to thwart improper conduct, but enforcement is often lax. Once a registrant becomes a member, he or she can post personal information, images or other information depending upon the features available at the site. Unless a user chooses to enable privacy options, all the information posted may be visible to all other users of a site.

What are the dangers?

Those who misuse the sites may do so in many ways including:

Luring / enticement – Internet sexual predators and known sex offenders have used social networking sites to locate and lure victims.

Identity theft – Criminals steal the identities of those who post personal information.

Cyberbullying / harassment – Agitators post derogatory, hurtful or threatening information about others.

Stalking – Stalkers can use personal information posted to the sites to locate and pursue victims.

Fraud schemes – Criminals who wish to defraud others of money or property can locate victims, gain their trust, and then take advantage of that trust for criminal purposes.

Inappropriate sexual content – Some users post sexually explicit information that is inappropriate for young computer users. Prevention What can you do to protect yourself from those who misuse social networking sites?

Do’s and Don’ts

Don’t -

• post personal images • post your true full name • post your home or cellular phone number • post your true age or date of birth • post your true home or business address • post your school name or the grad that you are in • post your calendar of upcoming events or information about your future whereabouts.

Do -

• discuss Internet risks with your child • enter into a safe-computing contract with your child • enable computer Internet filtering features if they are available from your Internet service • consider installing monitoring software or keystroke capture devices on your family computer that will help monitor your child's Internet activity • know each of your child's passwords, screen names and all account information • put the computer in a family area of the household and do not permit private usage • report all inappropriate non-criminal behavior to the site through their reporting procedures • report criminal behavior to the appropriate law enforcement agency including the NCMEC Cybertip line or the Internet Fraud Complaint Center • contact your legislators and request stronger laws against Internet crime • contact the corporations who place advertisements on the sites and let them know that their advertising is helping to support inappropriate Internet behavior. Also, let the corporations know that you intend to boycott or discontinue using their product or services because of the behavior they are supporting. • visit the NCMEC Netsmartz Workshop at http://www.netsmartz.org for more information • remember that every day is Halloween on the Internet. People on the Internet are not always as they first appear.

Making Social Networking Sites Safer

The following suggestions would make social networking sites safer for users and more law- enforcement friendly.

o On every social networking site web page, display a clearly visible hyperlink permitting users to easily report misconduct.
o For new users, make the default settings for viewing and sharing all account information ‘private’. This means that new accounts would be automatically set to exclude others and to not share information. The new subscriber would have to actively choose to share account information by checking the appropriate boxes in the account settings section.
o On every web page, display a link to the national sex offender registry.
o Proprietors of social networking sites should install filtering software to eliminate users from posting obscene words.
o Require that all new users enter verifiable credit card information when first subscribing.
o Require that all subscribers pay a nominal monthly fee.
o Include a provision in the social networking sites terms of use that notifies users that they have no expectation of privacy with regards to any of the content they post and that law enforcement may obtain any and all of their postings through the use of a subpoena only - without a search warrant.
o Retain profile information for deleted accounts for 90 days.
o Remove the browse and search functions that permit users to locate one another.
o On every social networking site page, display a link to the Internet Crime Complaint Center for incidents of theft or fraud. Their link is www.ic3.gov
o Include an admonition on social networking sites profile pages advising users that revealing personal information could lead to identity theft or victimization by offenders who are intent upon harassment, stalking, fraud or identity theft.
o Preserve changes to user’s pages and the Internet protocol address associated with the changes for 90 days.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SELECTED ICAC CASE STUDIES – ARIZONA ICAC TASK FORCE

Milwaukee Boy Found in Phoenix Home of Sex Offender

From the Arizona Republic, Aug. 23, 2005, Reported by William Hermann

Phoenix police say the experience of the 13-year-old Milwaukee boy they found Monday night in the company of a man they suspect of using the Internet to lure the child to town is one that parents need to take to heart.

Phoenix Police Sergeant Kardasz said Milwaukee police on Aug. 17 had received a missing persons report from the boy's mother. Investigators went into her son's computer and found that he had been communicating regularly with a person using a Phoenix wireless Internet site. "We went to the address of the wireless user and pretty quickly found he was an innocent person whose wireless service was being used by someone else," Kardasz said. "Through investigative work my staff established who was using the wireless connection, we watched his house, and soon the man drove up with the boy in his car."

At about 11:30 p.m. police arrested Vernon Monk, 31."The suspect had no ID and was using a false name and a fictitious license plate and pretending to be the boy's father to people in the neighborhood," Kardasz said. Monk was arrested for custodial interference and booked into a Maricopa County Jail. Police also learned that there is an outstanding arrest warrant on Monk from Seminole County, Okla., for a sexual offense against a minor. The boy was taken to the county's Juvenile Court Center to stay until his mother could arrange for his return home.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Internet Sexual Predator / Traveler Arrested and Imprisoned

Offender: David Jackson Donan, w/m, age 61

In September 2003, an investigation began involving an unidentified person using the Internet screen name "Brasshatter." Investigators learned that "Brasshatter" intended to travel via commercial aircraft from Austin, Texas to Phoenix, Arizona for the purpose of meeting a minor to engage in unlawful sexual intercourse.

"Brasshatter" was later identified as David Jackson Donan, age 61, with residences in both California and Texas. On October 20, 2003 Donan boarded a commercial aircraft and traveled from Texas to Arizona. To groom and entice his intended victim, he brought several packages of the candy - Skittles. To aid in his intended unlawful sexual acts he brought nine sexual aide devices, KY Jelly, a male sexual enhancement drug, a prescription for Viagra, and a digital camera - all in his carry-on baggage.

Donan was arrested without incident upon his arrival at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport. He made no statements and was booked. Arizona ICAC investigators and FBI agents in Arizona, California, and Texas worked cooperatively in the subsequent investigation and search of Donan's residences for evidence. They uncovered computer evidence, firearms and other sexual aid devices belonging to Donan. Later forensics examinations of his computer also revealed a collection of child pornography.

Computer evidence indicated that Donan had bragged during Internet chat conversations about having victimized children while he had visited Thailand many years ago. Donan waived his right to trial plead guilty to one count of the Federal offense: Travel with intent to engage in a sexual act with a juvenile (Title 18, Part I, Chapter 117, 2423b).

Donans' presentence report was not favorable with indications that he had prior "hands-on" offenses with as-yet unidentified victims. On September 29, 2004, he plead guilty in U.S. Federal District Court (Phoenix).

Honorable Earl H. Carroll presided. Judge Carroll sentenced Donan to 7 years, 3 months prison, followed by one year residence in a transitional facility, $25,000 fine and lifetime supervised release. -

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

International Cooperation Leads to Child Pornography Trafficker

Offender: Lee McCulloch, w/m, age 26, resident of Gwent, South Wales, U.K.

Occupation: Factory worker, Marital status: single

Arrest Location: Abertillery, Gwent - South Wales, United Kingdom Charge: Distributing Indecent Photographs of Children (United Kingdom)

Sentence: Eight months prison, Sex offender registration for five years. Agencies involved: Arizona ICAC Task Force, Phoenix P.D., Phoenix F.B.I., Heddlu Gwent P.D. South Wales, U.K.

In April 2003, an investigator from the Arizona Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force / Phoenix P.D. initiated an investigation into an unidentified child pornography trafficker. the investigation led to an unknown suspect in the United Kingdom.

Working with the FBI and the Heddlu Gwent (UK) Police Department, investigators assembled a case that led to the identification and arrest of 26 year old Lee McCulloch in South Wales, UK. McCulloch, a factory worker, used computers at his home in the United Kingdom to collect and traffic images of child pornography with other nefarious Internet associates. cCulloch, who is unmarried, was arrested on November 28, 2003.

Investigators in the UK developed further information leading to twenty (20) other suspects there with whom McCulloch traded unlawful images of child pornography. On August 26, 2004, McCulloch was sentenced to 8 months in prison in the UK and five years of sex offender registration status.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Mojica Santos - Internet Sexual Predator

Arrest Date/Time: October 8, 2003, 1530 hours.

Offense: Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation

On October 8, 2003, David Mojica Santos, age 65, was arrested for luring a minor for sexual exploitation in northwest Phoenix. Santos first came to the attention of law enforcement in July 2003, when he used the Internet to solicit sexual conduct with a minor. Santos traveled from his residence in Mesa to a location in Northwest Phoenix where he intended to meet a minor for sex. He was arrested, booked, and subsequently released on bond. He later plead guilty to the court.

SENTENCING HEARING – STATEMENT OF SGT. KARDASZ

(The recent trend among judges in Maricopa County is to sometimes sentence such offenders to probation only, with no jail time. Anticipating this, we prepared a detailed statement to the sentencing judge. Here is an excerpt):

Your Honor, the innocent children we struggle to protect are unable to appear here today. They are children whose innocence was stolen by Internet sexual predators like this defendant. Most of those children 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. According to reports from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, one in five girls and one in ten boys will be sexually victimized before they reach adulthood, and less than 35% of these crimes will ever be reported.

The Internet provides an unparalleled opportunity for criminals to unearth themselves and victimize unwary young people. Research indicates that of the estimated 24 million child Internet users, one in five 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. Over the past few years our caseload has skyrocketed while our resources have not.

Our investigation of this defendant revealed that his Internet chat was not an isolated incident butpart of a series of ongoing offenses occurring against multiple victims over an extended period of time. He was not the unfortunate victim of a "sting" caught at the wrong place at the wrong time. He is a practiced Internet sexual predator. Forensics analysis of his computer revealed that he did not spend his idle time enjoying normal retirement hobbies or mentoring his family or community.

    This former missionary spent his day prowling cyberspace in search of young sexual prey. We discovered Internet chat conversations he had with four as yet unidentified girls aged fifteen, fourteen and eleven. In each of the chats he quickly turned the conversation to sex and began to manipulate each girl towards meeting him for sex.

    I am going to read brief excerpts of the chat conversations the defendant had with various young girls he contacted on the Internet. Much of the language is so sexually graphic that I will not repeat it verbatim.

"Do you like older guys?"
"Have you had sex yet?"
"Are you curious about having sex?"
"Do you think you would like to have sex sometime soon?"
"I wish I was next door to you....and then maybe not. I might rape you."
"What city do you live in....I was just wondering if there is a    large airport nearby."
"You just don't know how badly I want to (expletive) you right now."

And I will stop there your Honor because the conversations deteriorate graphically from there.

Your Honor, I have watched defendants in similar circumstances appear in these courtrooms arguing that everything they did was fantasy role-playing and that they were the unfortunate victims of zealous police operations. That's hogwash. Was it fantasy when this defendant drove over 20 miles from Mesa to Northeast Phoenix for the expressed purpose of meeting a minor for sex? Was it fantasy when the defendant brought condoms with him to the meeting? Condoms that he admitted that he does not use with his wife. Apologists for this defendant may look at his age and surmise that he has little capacity for future offenses - I disagree.

This defendant had the physical capacity to proudly display on the Internet, graphic sexual images of himself, captured with a computer web camera and in a variety of poses. In similar cases my colleagues and I have watched defendants receive minimal sentencing by other courts, only to re-offend later. In one recent case the defendant mocked the court by continuing to solicit minors for sex while the defendant was out on bond only days after his original arrest. In another of our cases, the convicted defendant, while free on probation, immediately began producing, acting in, and trafficking child pornography, including images of himself sexually abusing three young children under shocking and horrifying circumstances.

The Arizona law as it stands permits the court to exercise wide discretion in sentencing this offense. We trust that this court will act in the best interest of our community and send a strong message to this and all other Internet sexual predators. Finally your honor, we request that this court's judgment provide a message of reassurance to the children unable to appear in your courtroom today that their rights are being defended at this, the highest level of County justice.

SENTENCE - On June 18, 2004, Santos was sentenced before Judge Hotham of the Maricopa County Superior Court. He received ten months jail and lifetime probation.

Posted by Dr. Kardasz at 12:33 AM | Permalink

NWLA News.com. By Daniel Davidson. 10/29/07

The Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force (ICAC) has been hard at work busting locals for various offenses through the computer.

Charles Melton Edwards Jr., 32, of the 200 block of Childs Road, allegedly traveled to a Webster Parish convenience store to meet with what he thought was an underage girl. Instead of finding a little girl, he found himself being arrested by ICAC agents. Officers said Edwards admitted to being addicted to pornography and spending a lot of time on the computer.

“Instead of spending time with his own wife and children, he admitted to staying on the computer from the time he woke up until the time he went to sleep,” said Webster Parish Detective Scott Tucker. Edwards was arrested and charged with computer aided solicitation; indecent behavior; and attempted carnal knowledge. He was booked into Bayou Dorcheat Detention Center on $175,000 bond.

Other recent ICAC arrests are as follows:

-  Thomas Williams, of the 9,000 block of Deren Rd. in Mooringsport, was arrested for computer aided solicitation of a minor for sexual purposes; indecent behavior with a juvenile; possession of schedule II (Marijuana); possession of schedule III (Lortab); possession of schedule IV (Xanax); possession of drug paraphernalia; and illegal carrying of a weapon. He was booked into Caddo Correctional Center on a $158,405.50 bond.

- Matthew Walter Schueler, of the 5,000 block of Greenwood Road in Shreveport, turned himself over to Hammond police on an active warrant for computer aided solicitation of a minor for sexual purposes.

Retrieved November 3, 2007 from http://www.nwlanews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6317&Itemid=57

Posted by Dr. Kardasz at 01:21 PM | Permalink

The Dickson Herald. 11/02/07. By Heather Donahoe

A La Vergne man was arrested today and charged with receipt, possession and distribution of child pornography by Franklin Police Department's Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, in conjunction with the US Secret Service. Brian J. Files, 46, was indicted recently by the federal grand jury of the Middle Tennessee district, according to a news release from Franklin Police. Charges against Files resulted from a lengthy investigation initiated by the Connecticut State Police Computer Crimes and Electronic Evidence Unit in 2004. Information obtained in that investigation led authorities to the Knoxville Police Department's ICAC unit, which coordinated with Franklin's unit on an investigation. Files was turned over to federal authorities today. A detention hearing for him is set for Tuesday.

Retrieved November 3, 2007 from http://www.dicksonherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071102/COUNTY09/71102052

Posted by Dr. Kardasz at 01:19 PM | Permalink