Two Years For Man Who Molested Niece
“A Spruce Grove man was sentenced today to two years in prison to possessing and accessing child pornography and sexually interfering with his young niece. He cannot be named to protect the identity of the girl, who shares his last name. In court today, the burly man with a long grey moustache promised the judge he would pay attention during sex offender treatment programs. ‘I’m aware of what I did and I have to pay the consequences,’ he said. ‘I have no intention of offending again.’ The man also has a fetish for adult diapers and child-size sex dolls. The man’s siblings alerted authorities to their brother’s bizarre behaviour and police conducted a search of the small home he shared with his elderly mother on Jan. 7, 2007. There they discovered more than a thousand DVDs and CDs, some of which were labelled Incest, Teen Tryout and Little Girls. They also found eight large child dolls. Police later reviewed the DVDs and CDS and found more than 100 child porn images and videos and hundreds of written and audio stories about incest and sex with children. Police seized his computer, but the man then built another one using old computer parts. He was arrested at work on Jan. 23, 2007. He told police he used the dolls ’so I don’t really do it with children.’ The man then confessed to molesting his niece when she was three or four years old. After his arrest, family members cleaned his room and found a handwritten note describing the man’s fantasies about drugging another niece with sleeping pills and videotaping himself sexually assaulting her.” — Edmonton Journal (Canada)
In its outlines, this story is depressingly familiar. On any given day, you can scan the news and find twenty more just like it. Where this story differs is in its details. For example, the man used “child-size” sex dolls as a way of satisfying his urges. Do you think this decreases or increases the likelihood of somebody actually molesting children? You can see it going either way. On one hand, it’s a legal albeit creepy way of satisfying illicit desires. On the other hand, perhaps it habituates a person to the prospect of having sex with a child. It would be interesting to see a scientific analysis of this question. Do sex dolls that represent children encourage or discourage harmful behavior? (And where did this guy keep his “eight large child dolls?” Sounds like these would be tough to hide in a closet or under a bed.)
Though authorities recovered a trove of 1000 DVDs and CDs, they only found “100 child porn images and videos.” That’s a relatively small number to find on 1000 disks. It implies that the vast bulk of the guy’s porn was legal. Alternatively, the authorities may have felt as though they gathered enough evidence to convict the guy and didn’t bother scanning all 1000 disks. Additionally, there were “hundreds of written and audio stories about incest and sex with children.” Another article about the case mentioned that the guy was “listening to child pornography on his MP3 player.” Kiddie Porn for the iPod? Podcasts for pedophiles? Pedocasts? It would be interesting to have an expert opinion (anyone?) on the legality of such things. Presumably recordings of actual abuse would be illegal. Would clearly fictional stories be legal? What if the stories were acted out like radio plays so that you couldn’t tell whether or not it was real just by listening to the thing?
First, let me asure you that ALL of the discs and videos were gone through. The chance of finding pics of the perp at work would have assured a thorough search of everything.
As to the behavioral research regarding the catharsis versus habituating nature of acts performed with the dolls, the problem is that the research itself would cross the lines of ethical standards on use of human subjects. We know for a fact that participating in sex with anything that resembles a child increases the chance that a real child will become involved. Not every person who humps child dolls will offend, but some will, and that makes it unethical research. Determining that 99 out of 100 men who have sex with dolls will not go on to offend with real children but that one will is considered not an acceptable outcome, because by conducting the experiment you’ve created the behavior you’re looking to measure in some of your subjects. You’ve caused actual harm to another person without their consent, and that’s one of the definitions of unethical.
The kiddie porn laws are written loosely enough to allow prosecution for aural material. Never heard of it being done, but the option is there.
Interesting. Thanks, Recluse.
More importanly, where can I purchase one (or eight) of these dolls?
If that’s what passes for science these days no wonder the Japanese can still beat the crap out of us.
“We know for a fact that participating in sex with anything that resembles a child…”
Where’s the research? I’d like a link to an academic paper proving this. Which leads on to…
The problem that your Gedanken experiment has no control group, and so is scientifically useless. If one paedo who screws a child doll goes on to screw a real kid, how do we know he wouldn’t have done it anyway? Moreover, how do we know that the other 99 wouldn’t have done it too, had they not had recourse to the dolls? In such a case *not* doing the experiment would be the unethical option…
Also, you’re working in the wrong direction. Due to current social conventions it would be impossible to obtain a representative group of paedophiles to participate in such a study – you’d only be able to get hold of convicts, which’d skew the results. You’d need to work back in the other direction: start with the convicts, and try to work out what percentage of them had ever slept with a juvenile sex doll, and then compare with with data on the number of latex Lolitas sold. It’s not entirely accurate or helpful (indeed, it doesn’t even prove cause and effect, only, possibly, a correlation), but it’s the best we’d be able to do. This, incidentally, is also why I suspect that “we know for a fact” claim. Most meths drinkers will have been to school at some point in their lives, but this doesn’t mean that education turns you into a meths drinker.
All comments become the property of PervScan. You must use an email address to post a comment. However, PervScan disallows email addresses in the text of comments.
Jailbait