An examination of judicial sentencing decisions in child pornography and child molestation cases in Canada
| Pages | 38-50 |
| Published date | 16 March 2012 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/20093821211210486 |
| Date | 16 March 2012 |
| Author | Sandy Jung,Shayla Stein |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Public policy & environmental management,Sociology |
An examination of judicial sentencing
decisions in child pornography and child
molestation cases in Canada
Sandy Jung and Shayla Stein
Abstract
Purpose – Accessing and distributing child pornography is an emerging problem. This paper aims to
examine the judicial sentencing decisions of child pornography cases and whether they differ from
decisions of child molestation cases.
Design/methodology/approach – Using a legal database of Canadian court judgments, the study
examined sentencing decisions of 50 child pornography and 50 child molestation cases, identifying
variables that were present in the judges’ reasons for their decision.
Findings – The results revealed a disparity in sentencing that favours incarceration rather than
community sentences for child molesters over child pornography cases. Despite what appears to be
lighter sentences for child pornography offenders, judges were more likely to sanction treatment and
recommend restrictions in cases of child pornography than child molestation. In light of the absence of
literature exploring sentencing disparity amo ng child sexual offences, further directions and
suggestions for practice are discussed.
Practical implications – The examination of the disparity of sentencing decisions for child molesters
and child pornography offenders and the identified variables that may contribute to these decisions
suggests that the judiciary views child pornography and child molestation offenders differently and are
more punitive toward contact offenders. Such disparity has implications for the criminal justice system.
Originality/value – This study offers the first exploration of sentencing disparity and decisions on child
pornography and child molestation cases in Canada.
Keywords Child pornography,Sex offenders, Child molestation, Sentencing, Judges, Courts, Canada,
Criminal courts
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Accessing and distributing child pornography is an emerging problem within the last ten
years that has been facilitated by the widespread use of computers and the internet. Thereis
a body of literature that has examined the characteristics of child pornography offenders
and their clinical differences from contact child molesters. However, relatively little work has
examined the judicial sentencing decisions of child pornography cases and whether they
differ from decisions of child molestation cases.
A present concern faced by clinicians is exploring the taxonomy of child pornography
offenders in order to determine accurate guidelines for assessment, sentencing, treatment,
and management. Although there is little research to formulate a conclusion on the exact
relationship between child pornography offenders and child molesters, they are intuitively
comparable. It has been suggested that child pornography offenders are clinically
homogenous to child molestation offenders, but are merely utilising a new technology to
carry out their offences (Babchishin et al., 2010). Further research has postulated the
existence of distinct categories of child pornography offenders that provide evidence
against the suggestion of complete homogeny. Quayle and Taylor (2002) and Seto et al.
PAGE 38
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY
j
VOL. 2 NO. 1 2012, pp. 38-50, QEmerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 2009-3829 DOI 10.1108/20093821211210486
Sandy Jung and
Shayla Stein are based at
Grant MacEwan University,
Edmonton, Canada.
Sandy Jung is based in the
Department of Psychology.
Some of the data in this
research were presented at the
annual conference of the
Canadian Psychological
Association in Toronto, Ontario,
in June 2011. The authors
would like to thank Kevin Nunes
and Alberto Choy for their
helpful comments on an earlier
draft.
To continue reading
Request your trial