Typology of Paedophile Picture Collections
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X0107400202 |
| Date | 01 April 2001 |
| Published date | 01 April 2001 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
MAX. TAYLOR,1
GEMMA
HOLLAND AND
ETHEL QUAYLE
COPINE Project, Child Studies Unit, Department
of
Applied
Psychology, University College Cork
TYPOLOGY OF PAEDOPHILE
PICTURE COLLECTIONS2
Over recent years, offences related to the production, possession and
distribution of child pornography have assumed great prominence.
Public attention has focused on these crimes as being particularly
repellent and deserving of both proactive policing and, when detected,
full and extensive investigation. Increased awareness of the problem of
child pornography has been associated with a parallel recognition of the
significance of the Internet as a medium for the distribution of both
child pornography and the facilitation and propagation of a number of
sexual offences against children. Most European countries have statutes
that criminalise possession of child pornography, and it is now regar-
ded as a serious offence in most jurisdictions, attracting significant
sentences on conviction.
Because of its emotive nature and also because possession is, in the
main, illegal, research into child pornography has been limited. Little is
known about the nature and extent of child pornography precisely
because it is an illegal trade, and the distinctive qualities contributed by
the current principal medium of distribution, the Internet, add even
further complexity. Such work that there is tends to be from a limited
evidential perspective. Lanning (1992), in what is amongst the most
significant contributions to this area, outlined a behaviour analysis of
child molesters describing the role of child pornography in their
offending behaviour. He discussed motivation for collecting, the func-
tions of collection and the characteristics of collections (for example
important, constant, organised, permanent, concealed and shared). A
major weakness of this work is its lack of empirical verification, relying
instead on the experience of Lanning in law-enforcement work in this
area. However, Lanning (24-6) introduces the important distinction
between child pornography ('the sexually explicit reproduction of a
child's image') and child erotica ('any material, relating to children,
that serves a sexual purpose for a given individual'). The significance
of this distinction is to emphasise the potential sexual qualities of a
whole range of kinds of photograph (and other material as well) not all
of which may meet obscenity criteria. The implications of that distinc-
tion in the context of the Internet could not at that time be fully
explored, although Lanning does, in that and later work, clearly
recognise the significance of the new technologies. The operational
The Police Journal, Volume 74 (2001) 97
To continue reading
Request your trial