By LIZ GOFFOne
of the voices on the audiotape bore the squeaky, curious characteristics of a prepubescent
boy – his imagination stuck somewhere between Superman and supermodels.
Log-on to "Predator Watch" a website listing the internet names and addresses of
sex offenders of children. |
His partner in the internet chat room was plainly a man. And based on
the raw language, the suggestions, this man was a predator – seeking sexual contact
with this boy and any other youngster he might "charm" into meeting with him.
The pair engaged in a total of 53 highly sexually explicit "chats" over a
period of seven weeks. During their final internet chat, the man convinced his young prey
to meet him on the following day in a Queens fast food restaurant at a shopping mall near
the boy’s home.
To meet the boy, the man flew 1,094 miles from Orlando, Florida.
The pair met where and when they had planned.
The man approached the boy carefully, making sure he had the right youngster. They
talked small talk – about taxi rides, why the boy skipped school and why the man
wasn’t at work. That’s when it happened. The man suggested that the boy
accompany him to his motel room to "do the things" they had discussed.
As the pair stood to leave the restaurant, a team of plainclothes police officers
bursted into the room, advising the man that he was under arrest for meeting with the boy
for the purpose of sexual activity.
As the team approached, the "boy" stood, removed a baseball cap and raised
his sweatshirt over "his" waistline to reveal a detective’s shield. The man
grunted, cursed and shook his head when he realized that the "boy" was actually
a female cop – the same officer he had discussed having sex with during the 53
conversations over the internet.
Keeping kids safe – Bob Stuber
with his "charges."
Photo Courtesy of SCI
|
You may ask why police who investigated this case
waited through 53 conversations, and did not arrest the man until he suggested that the
boy accompany him for sex.
The answer is not complicated.
But it is frustrating, anger-provoking.
It is not illegal for any person to speak, suggest or act
out sexual situations with another person – even a child – over the internet.
Current laws mandate that any such arrest would be considered an infringement on the
individual’s right to freedom of speech.
It is, however, illegal for an adult to arrange to meet
with a person he knows is a minor (under 17) for the purpose of sexual contact. In
addition, the adult must suggest the sexual contact – not the youth.
That’s the law – like it or not. And until some
legislative body acts to amend it, police are forced to track down sexual predators of
children over the internet by becoming children themselves. In the case described here, as
in all cases, police make audio tapes of internet conversations between predators and
officers posing as youngsters. Likewise, the final "meet" prior to anticipated
sexual contact is caught on audio and videotape for use as evidence.
In 2000, sex offenders utilized the internet for sex with
12, and 13-year-old children (in the metropolitan area) 6,100 (verifiable) times, law
enforcement officials said.
One Tuff Computer Cop
Law enforcement officials said that part of the problem stems from the fact that many
parents view the internet as a babysitter. Youngsters arrive home from school to an empty
house and immediately go online, unsupervised.
In a recent survey conducted by the Association of Parents Against Predators, an
internet child advocacy group with offices in midtown and Washington, D.C., 140 of 185
youngsters polled between ages 11-13 had internet access "carte blanche," or
unsupervised. Those polled came from lower to medium-income families, the survey said.
Low-income families often do not have access to computers at home, and youngsters from
those families most often utilize computers at after-school centers where they are
strictly supervised.
Many of the 140 youngsters displayed low self-esteem problems, had few or no friends
and were left alone for long intervals, the study said.
"These are superhighway latchkey kids," law enforcement sources said.
"We teach our children to not speak with strangers, to not discuss anything about
themselves with strangers. It’s time we told our children to stay away from strangers
on the internet, as well."
Former NYPD Detective Bo Dietl has designed a computer program to aid parents in their
efforts to check-up on how youngsters are utilizing the internet. By using "One Tuff
Computer Cop," parents can catch e-mail chat with ease. The program also deciphers
"emoticons," a secret online language developed and used by kids.
ComputerCOP Deluxe, the latest version of ComputerCOP Corps’ ComputerCOP software,
is engineered to be used by family members to determine how a computer is being used. It
examines a computer’s disk drives, looking for images and text files containing
potentially inappropriate words or phrases.
To further monitor chat and e-mail sessions, the program installs a
keystroke-monitoring tool that can be set up to be totally invisible to the computer
users. The keystroke-monitoring tool will catch objectionable words, within their
contexts, that are typed on the computer.
All suspect words found are documented in an exploding directory tree structure in the
order of their frequency of use. This allows the user to get a complete overview of the
computer’s suspect textual content from a single screen of information. Included in
the "word category directory tree" are unallocated disk sectors that contain
suspect words or phrases.
ComputerCOP Deluxe is designed to run on Windows 95/98 machines, it is not possible to
determine that it has been run on a computer. Just pop it in, click it on and watch what
your kids are watching!
For information, log-on to www.computercopcorp.com or call 800-210-4209.
New York State legislators recently made it more difficult for child sex abusers to
reach out and touch their young prey.
Governor George Pataki hailed the passage of SARA (Sexual Assault Reform Act) as the
first major change in the 1965 state penal law defining sex crimes.
Included in the package is a provision that amends Megan’s Law to require sex
offenders to provide their internet accounts and screen names for publication on the State
Sex Offender Registry. Under Megan’s Law, convicted child sex abusers are required to
list their name(s), addresses, phone numbers – and now their internet identities and
addresses to the state registry when they are paroled or put on probation for their
crimes.
The New York State law – named for Megan Kanka, the 7-year-old New Jersey girl who
was raped and killed by a twice-convicted sex offender who was living in her neighborhood,
requires sex convicts to register with the state 10 days prior to their release from
prison or probation.
The offenders are classified according to three levels of risk, with those at level
three deemed the most likely to commit their acts again.
The risk level also determines the amount of information that may be released to the
public about the offender. A level one designation requires that local police be informed
of the offender’s presence in the area. Police are permitted to disseminate general
information about level two offenders to the public, and a level three designation allows
police to release specific information regarding the offender – including an exact
address.
The new provision also enhances Megan’s Law by expanding the category of offenses
covered by the statute, requiring a new class of offenders to sign up with the registry.
Additionally, offenders residing in New York State who committed their crimes in
another jurisdiction are now required to register with the state if their "home"
jurisdiction requires them to do so. It is expected that the new provision will require an
additional 5,780 offenders to register. There are currently 9,433 people listed on the
registry, which can be reached by calling 1-900-288-3838, or by e-mail at
www.Meganslaw.com.
A federal statute formerly precluded New York State from making any community
notification on offenders, based on a finding that they were not afforded adequate due
process to challenge their risk assessment. The amended law changes all that, by
establishing specific due process procedures for review of an offender’s risk level.
The registry listing includes the name and photo of each convict, a physical
description, address, condition of release and a description of the crime(s) and the
victims. The registry is organized by county and zip code, and even lists the make, model,
year and color of any car driven by the offender. A separate directory of offenders is
available for viewing at local police precincts.
