Online predators are individuals who commitchild sexual abuse that begins or takes place on theInternet.
Internet-facilitated crimes against minors involve deceit and begin with adults communicating with children over the Internet with the goal of coercing them into illegal sexual activity. Sometimes the sexual abuse happens face to face.[1][2]
Chat rooms,instant messaging,Internet forums,social networking sites,cell phones, and evenvideo game consoles have issues with online predations.[3][4][5][6] These online areas attract predators because they allow them to have access to make contact with victims without drawing attention.[7] In addition, there is insufficient reliable data concerning the number of minors sharing personal information online due to children's privacy issues.[8] Also, the anonymity of online conversations leads to thedisinhibition of minors, making them feel more comfortable and more likely to engage in risky behaviors.[9] This allows predators to use manipulation to put their targets into situations where they will comply with the predator's sexual demands. Initial manipulation often involves introducing the minors to sexual activity, showing them pornography, and requesting sexually explicit information and pictures.[10] This online predatory behavior does not often lead to actual or attempted offline contact,[7] but it could.
Even though it is the mainstream view that predators will use distinct tactics to meet victims, most actual in-person meetings do not involve any deception. In fact, the minors are usually complicit with perpetrators often using promises of love and romance to seduce victims to meet.[11]
Facebook has been involved in controversy as to whether it takes enough precautions against the sexual grooming of children.Jim Gamble, leader of theChild Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP) in the UK, said in 2010 that his office had received 292 complaints about Facebook users in 2009 but that none of the complaints had come directly from Facebook. A spokesman for Facebook responded to complaints by meeting CEOP directly in person, and said that they take safety issues "very seriously".[12]
In 2003,MSN implementedchat room restrictions to help protect children from adults seeking sexual conversations with them.[13]
In 2005,Yahoo! chat rooms were investigated by theNew York State attorney general's office for allowing users to create rooms whose names suggested they were being used for this purpose; that October, Yahoo! agreed to "implement policies and procedures designed to ensure" that such rooms would not be allowed.[14]
Computer programs have been developed to analyse chat rooms and otherinstant messaging logs for suspicious activity.[15] As this can be prevented not only on platform level but also on the point of entry, it is recommended that parents establish safe environments for their children to use the Internet, with reduced risk of encountering cyber grooming individuals.[16]
In Australia, themurder of Carly Ryan in February 2007 led to public opinion pressure which eventually resulted in nationwide legal changes, nicknamed "Carly's Law", being made in 2017 to help protect minors online.[17] Ryan, aged 15, was a victim of onlinegrooming and predatory behaviour, which was considered unique at the time, given that Ryan was the first person in Australia killed by an online predator.[18][19]
In the U.S., some risks involving online predatory behavior are addressed by theChildren's Internet Protection Act, which was passed in 2000.[20] This law required schools and libraries to install filtering and blocking software, to keep students away from obscene and harmful materials and individuals online.[21] A bill called HR 5319 or the "Deleting Online Predators Act of 2006" (DOPA) was later introduced, intensifying the provisions of CIPA.[22] As of 2007[update], the bill was effectively defeated.[23]
Some individuals have also initiated actions against laws designed to protect children.Doe v. Shurtleff, 628 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2010), was aUnited States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit case assessing the constitutionality ofUtah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5, a law that requiressex offenders to register their internet identifiers with the state in order to "assist in investigating kidnapping and sex-related crimes, and in apprehending offenders".[24][25] In this case, a convictedsex offender, appearing anonymously asJohn Doe, appealed a decision[26] by theU.S. District Court for the District of Utah tovacate an orderenjoining the enforcement of Utah Code Ann. § 77-27-21.5.
In its reportProtection of Children Against Abuse Through New Technologies, theCouncil of EuropeCybercrime Convention Committee addressed the emerging issues of violence against children through the use of new technologies (the issue ofchild pornography on theInternet is already covered by Article 9 Convention) with particular reference to grooming both through the internet and bymobile telephones.[27]
Some nations have already criminalized online sexual grooming in their national legislation. Analysis of these laws suggests some may be redundant with existing legislation and/or practices.[28]
[G]aming consoles such as PlayStation, Wii, and Xbox have become Internet-enabled, interactive devices. This provides an opportunity for pedophiles to befriend and groom minors.