|
Articles
Click on the article name to move to the beginning of
the article.
“Preventing Violence in Our
Schools”
To download this article click
here
“Preparing for School Attacks”
To download this article click
here
2005 Wisconsin Act 5
“Amie’s Law”
To download this article click here
G.A.T.E. (GANG AWARENESS TRAINING EDUCATION)
To download this article click
here
Abuse Reporting
Requirements - School Officials Not Exempt
To download this article click
here
When Days Are Gray: Avoiding
Burnout as Child Abuse Professionals
To download this article click
here.
Two Differing Views on
Child Hearsay Laws
To
download this article click
here.
What Are Pornographic Images of
Children?
To
download this article click
here.
When Multiple Images Of
Child Pornography Are Contained On Single Computer Disk
To
download this article click
here
|
Abuse Reporting Requirements -
School Officials Not Exempt
|
|
By Attorney
Larry Keating and Attorney David Judeika
On an ever-increasing basis, school officials
have encountered issues involving mandatory reporting requirements for teachers,
school counselors and school administrators regarding instances of child abuse
and neglect. A tension often exists between the mandatory reporting requirements
and the desire of teachers and school officials to resolve certain problems “in
house.” This article will address issues and situations wherein teachers, school
counselors and school administrators are statutorily required to immediately
inform county social service departments, a licensed child welfare agency under
contract with the county, or a law enforcement agency when such individuals
suspect child abuse or neglect. Lastly, this article will discuss how the
mandatory reporting requirement also applies in cases where the teacher or
school official believes abuse and/or neglect is likely to occur in the near
future.
THE LAW
In Wisconsin, Chapter 48.981 of the children’s
code governs mandatory reporting of suspected abuse or neglect. A failure to
report child abuse or neglect, as statutorily defined, occurs when an individual
who is required to report child abuse or neglect has reasonable cause to suspect
that a child observed in the course of professional duties has been abused or
neglected, and that individual intentionally fails to report. The statute
further identifies those individuals who are required to report and to whom the
reports must be made. Wis. Stat. § 48.981(2). Specifically identified are school
teachers, administrators and counselors. Moreover, the statute also provides
definitions as to what constitutes abuse and neglect. In short, “abused” means
physical injury inflicted by other than accidental means. Wis. Stat. § 48.02(1).
In short, the State has defined neglect has been defined as a “failure, refusal
or inability on the part of a parent, guardian, legal custodian or other person
exercising temporary or permanent control over a child, for reasons other than
poverty, to provide necessary care, food, clothing, medical or dental care or
shelter, so as to seriously endanger the health of the child.” Wis. Stat. §
48.981 (1)(d).
A case recently arose in Kenosha in which a
school administrator was charged with failing to report a case of abuse.
Apparently, steps were taken to resolve the problem within the school setting.
However, the District Attorney’s Office initially believed school officials had
failed to report the abuse as statutorily required and brought charges.
Ultimately, the charges were dropped after it was determined that the
administrator had fulfilled the reporting obligation by consulting with and
introducing the school liaison police officer to the reported victim. However,
in order to avoid exposure to prosecution for non-reporting, school
administrators should develop a specific written policy regarding mandatory
reporting. The policy should be developed with input from social welfare
agencies, law enforcement officials and legal counsel for the school district in
order to ensure it meets the statutory requirements. The policy should then be
distributed to staff for review and implementation. This will serve to avoid
conflicts between meeting the reporting requirements and attempting to resolve
such problems “in house.”
DETERMINING REASONABLE CAUSE
TO SUSPECT ABUSE OR NEGLECT
Obviously, school officials often become aware
of abuse or neglect in situations, which first present themselves as
disciplinary issues. Often, a change in the student’s behavior and the resultant
disciplinary action reveals the presence of abuse. A report to a trusted teacher
by a friend of the victim may occur as well. In cases involving suspected abuse
or neglect, school officials must first ascertain whether reasonable cause to
suspect that the child has been abused or neglected is present. Once the
teacher, counselor or official has determined that reasonable cause to suspect
that the child has been abused or neglected exists, the statutorily mandatory
reporting requirements are triggered. School officials must then notify the
appropriate county Department of Social Services, child welfare agency under
contract with the county department in counties with a population of 500,000 or
more, or the appropriate law enforcement agency. The mandatory reporting
requirement is met by immediately informing, by telephone or in person, the
Department of Social Services, or a law enforcement agency of the facts and
circumstances contributing to the reasonable suspicion that abuse or neglect has
occurred. Beyond such reporting, school officials are not statutorily required
to investigate further except to ensure the immediate safety of the child until
the proper agency representatives or authorities arrive to take charge of the
child.
ROLE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND
SOCIAL AGENCIES
Pursuant to the provisions of the statute, once
notified, the duties of local law enforcement agencies are also delineated. Wis.
Stat. 48.981 (3)(b). In short, the responding Sheriff or Police Department must
first determine if the health or safety of the child, or unborn child in the
event that a pregnancy is involved, is in immediate danger. If no such danger
exists referrals to social service agencies for further investigation and action
and the District Attorney’s office must follow if criminal prosecution is
warranted. Each department is further required to adopt written policies
regarding which types of reports will be referred to the District Attorney for
criminal prosecution. Therefore, juvenile officers should acquaint themselves
with the department policy in this area.
The duties of the county social welfare
department are also delineated within §48.981(3)(c). Each agency must initiate a
diligent investigation within 24 hours after having received a report for
threatened abuse or neglect. The investigation must be conducted in accordance
with the standards established by the agency in order to determine if “a child
is in need of protective services.” Wisconsin also requires that reports made
under Section 48.981 remain confidential. Section seven (7) of the statute
specifically delineates to whom these reports may be disclosed, including what
information may be subsequently disclosed to the original reporter. Once again,
the reader should refer to this section of the statue should specific questions
remain with respect to disclosure of reports.
Finally, a plan for coordinating the efforts of
school officials, social welfare and law enforcement agencies should be
developed. Such a plan will serve to ensure that suspected abuse or neglect is
timely reported, properly investigated, and kept confidential.
IMMUNITY FOR REPORTING
The final issue to be addressed with respect to
mandatory reporting is the issue of immunity from liability. Statutorily, any
person or institution that makes a report in good faith, conducts an
investigation or otherwise participates in becoming involved in the reporting or
investigation of suspected abuse or neglect enjoys immunity from any liability,
civil or criminal, which results by reason of this action. Wis. Stat. 48.981(4).
The law further presumes that the reporter has acted in good faith. This
provision serves to protect school officials from civil or criminal liability in
cases where the initial reporting had occurred in good faith even though a
subsequent investigation determined that no wrongdoing had occurred.
CONCLUSION
The Wisconsin statutes require school teachers,
counselors and administrative officials to report suspected child abuse or
neglect to social service or law enforcement agencies. The statutes also require
confidentiality with respect to reports and further afford reporting individuals
immunity from civil or criminal prosecution in cases where reports are made in
good faith. An intentional failure to report as required exposes teachers,
counselors and school administrators to possible criminal prosecution under the
Wisconsin statutes. Therefore, in cases where abuse or neglect is suspected,
school teachers, counselors and administrators should err on the side of caution
and fully and faithfully comply with the mandatory reporting requirements.
Finally, an effort should also be made to
develop written policies to better coordinate the efforts of the schools, social
welfare agencies and law enforcement to identify, report and fully investigate
cases of suspect abuse or neglect. These policies should be developed in
addition to those policies statutorily required to be developed by each
individual agency.
Special thanks to
Dawn Weiss for contacting Attorneys Keating and Judeika and asking them to
provide articles. Watch for more articles written especially for this
association. Thanks to Attorneys Keating and Judeika for this information.
|
|
When Days Are Gray:
Avoiding
Burnout as Child Abuse Professionals
|
|
By Victor
Vieth
"Children suffer not (I think) less than their elders but differently."
C.S. Lewis
Child
abuse professionals are engaged in a high stress, high burnout calling. Unless
and until this fact is adequately addressed, we will continue to see high
turnover rates among child abuse professionals. Several common reasons for this
burnout, and some possible solutions are offered in this article.
FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO BURNOUT
First, child protection officials are seldom honored in their departments and
communities.
Some years ago, I spoke with a police officer handling nothing but cases of
child abuse. The officer told me that many of her colleagues, such as those
working in the drug unit, were honored for their labor. The narcotics officers
executing a search warrant returned to the police station with guns, scales,
drugs, money and other "cool" stuff. Their fellow officers lavished praise on
them for doing a good, even noble act. But the child abuse officer told me that
when she executes a search warrant, she returns to the police station with
dildos, child pornography, Vaseline and other items that cause her colleagues to
wrinkle their noses and inquire "how can you deal with this sick stuff all the
time?" Nobody in her department, card club, church or neighborhood wanted to
listen to her lament about the children keeping her awake at night.
Second, child abuse professionals are actually dishonored.
This is
true even when the child abuse official does a stellar, sometimes heroic deed.
As an example of the abuse inflicted on social workers, consider the following
scenario. After New York social worker Marc Parent talked a troubled youth out
of killing a younger sibling, both children were taken into custody. According
to Parent, the mother of the children called and "hand-delivered a first class
ranting before I could even say hello.
The attacks flew out of her mouth like
rusty nails..."
Hostility comes not only from the victims and their families but also from the
media, judges, and fellow service providers. As one commentator notes:
Service
recipients, members of the judiciary, and other co-professionals occasionally
offer resistance by being verbally hostile, accusatory, and demanding. These
responses can make the case load seem undesirable and can easily lead workers to
feelings of inadequacy, loss of self-
Third, college, graduate and law schools seldom prepare students for the reality
that is child protection.
Reporter Anna Quindlen describes a social worker's obstacles as follows:
Their
training is inadequate, and the number of workers is too small for the number of
families in trouble. Some of the cases would require a battalion of cops,
doctors, and social workers to handle; instead there are two kids fresh out of
college with good intentions and a handful of forms.
Commenting on his lack of training, Marc Parent said he received "two weeks of
solemn discussions on child protective issues, but little on getting a drug
dealer to let you into an abandoned building or talking a restless police
officer into sticking around until you get through with a case and back into
your car."
Fourth, the drumbeat of beaten, burned, bound, bludgeoned, raped and murdered
children will, eventually, take its toll.
We may pretend not to feel the pain but, for that to really be the case, we
would have to be cold blooded. The impact may come subtly. We're afraid to let
our children sleep over at a friend's house. We start to inspect the bruise of
every playground child and wonder whether or not it is suspicious. We talk of
torn hymens while we dine and wonder why our spouses lose interest in the food.
Then, all of a sudden, it hits us. We are our work.
SUGGESTIONS FOR REDUCING BURNOUT
It is
not enough to recognize the reality of burnout among child abuse professionals,
we must be proactive in combating it. Toward this end, consider the following
suggestions.
First, be well trained.
If, for example, your job involves speaking to children, make sure you have a
thorough grounding in child development, memory and suggestibility research, and
linguistics.
Adequate training will produce stronger cases and fewer opportunities for
defense attorneys, the public, and others to hurl rocks in your direction.
Training also allows you to take a breather, reflect, and then develop the best
practices. Training energizes child abuse professionals and gives us important
contacts that can assist in the handling of difficult cases. If you
are a supervisor, make sure your budget allows for adequate training
opportunities not only as a means of delivering quality service to the
community, but as a means of assuring the emotional well-being of the keepers of
the children.
Second, support the members of your multi-disciplinary team.
Make a concerted effort to get together on regularly scheduled social outings as
a means of unwinding and offering each other support. If your jurisdiction does
not have a multi-disciplinary team, this is one more reason to start one.
Third, praise one another often and in public.
Press releases announcing a child abuse conviction should include public praise
for the investigators and prosecutors handling the case. In addition, send
personal thank you notes to all the workers involved in the case. Rather than a
form letter, take the time to understand why the work of the child protection
professional made a difference and commend the work accordingly. It can be as
simple as writing "your interrogation of the suspect was extremely helpful in
convincing the jury how unbelievable the defendant's story was." In the same
vein, prosecutor organizations, bar associations and other groups should give
awards or other recognition to those who do the job of child protection and who
excel.
Fourth, keep a file of thank you letters you receive from victims and colleagues
over the years.
When days are gray and defeatism starts to set in, take a look at the file and
remind yourself that sometimes you do make a difference. I know a prosecutor who
keeps a collage in his office of the artwork child abuse victims sent to him
over the years as a means of expressing their gratitude.
Fifth, consider the option of periodically leaving the work of child abuse.
Choosing to handle drug or other cases for a time may allow you to get
rejuvenated and come back to the child abuse unit with renewed energy. In some
cases, it may not be necessary to leave the work of child abuse altogether but
simply to handle a different aspect of it. For example, handling civil as
opposed to criminal child protection cases may be sufficient. If you
take a respite from your traditional duties, do not come back until you are
ready. Well-meaning colleagues who miss you may encourage you to come back or
may repeatedly contact you for advice on difficult cases. Make it clear that you
are making a temporary, but clear break from child protection work and that you
will return when you are emotionally able to do so.
Sixth, find a unique approach to motivation.
Recognize that the nature of our work puts us in the middle of broken homes
overflowing with emotion and that we will inevitably be verbally abused, even by
the victims we are trying to protect. To put this in perspective, remember you
are not alone. Remember the words of Earl Warren, "everything I did in my life
that was worthwhile, I caught hell for."
Better
yet, have these words matted, framed and hung in your office. Some
child abuse professionals may rely on their faith to sustain them. Prosecutors
such as Robert Kennedy and Christopher Darden have found religion helpful in
coping with the injustices of our justice system and of life itself.
Creighton University Law Professor Joseph G. Allegretti suggests the high
burnout rate in the legal profession is in part attributable to the fact that
lawyers do not rely on their faith to sustain them in their work."
Seventh, never lose heart.
As child abuse professionals, we know our lot in life is different from the lot
of others. Other people may read, see, and hear the ugliness of the world but,
by and large, they do so from behind the security of their newspapers, radios
and television sets. We, on the other hand, experience the ugliness of the world
up close and personal. We actually hear the quivering voice of a child who
speaks to us about abuse. We actually see the disfigured face of a woman beaten
solely because doing so made somebody feel strong.
We learn
of a man in Waco, Texas who sexually abuses children in the name of God. We
learn of another man in Oklahoma who bombs children in the name of patriotism
and, at some point, we begin to wonder if the whole world is insane, or is it
us? If you have ever had a thought like this, perhaps you will find comfort in
the words of Cesar Chavez who, in a speech in 1967, said:
When we
are really honest with ourselves, we must admit our lives are all that really
belong to us. So it is how we use our lives that determines what kind of men we
are. It is my deepest belief that only by giving our lives do we find life. I am
convinced that the truest act of courage, the strongest act of manliness, is to
sacrifice ourselves for others in a totally no-violent struggle for justice. To
be a man is to suffer for others. God help us be men.
If you
are not sure you have ever been near a hero or heroine, take a look at your
colleagues. If you are not sure you have ever looked into the eyes of someone
you knew to have courage, don't let the sun set tonight without looking in a
mirror.
The
weakest, the most precarious of vessels floating on the stream of life are those
rafts occupied by abused children. For your willingness, even eagerness to
commandeer one of these little boats, may God richly bless you.
Director, APRI's National Center for Prosecution of Child Abuse.
C.S. LEWIS, SURPRISED BY JOY 18 (1955).
MARC PARENT; TURNING STONES: MY DAYS AND NIGHTS WITH CHILDREN AT RISK 29 (1996).
LORI HOMES & INTA SELLARS, A GUIDE FOR CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES, LAW
ENFORCEMENT, AND COUNTY ATTORNEYS IN MINNESOTA, SECOND EDITION AT 8-9 (1997)
(citations omitted) .
Anna Quindlen, Foreword to MARC PARENT, TURNING STONES: MY DAYS AND NIGHTS WITH
CHILDREN AT RISK (1996).
Id. At 42.
This training is available at Finding Words, a course offered by APRI's National
Center for Prosecution of Child Abuse.
The prosecutor is Brian Holmgren in the office of the District Attorney,
Nashville, Tennessee.
This quotation appears in a postcard advertising the PBS broadcast of Super
Chief: The Life and Legacy of Earl Warren.
See Victor I. Vieth, Do Lawyers Need Religion? 80 BENCH & BAR 30 (September
1996).
See generally, JOSEPH G. ALLEGRETTI, THE LAWYER'S CALLING (1996)
ARTHUR M. SCHLESINGER, JR., ROBERT KENNEDY AND HIS TIMES 910 (1978).
|
|
Two Differing Views on
Child Hearsay Laws
|
|
American
Prosecutor’s Research Institute (APRI) Update Express, June 2003. Reprinted
with acknowledgement.
Carpenter
v. State,
786 N.E.2d 696 (Ind. 2003)-Indiana
On appeal, the defendant
challenges the trial court’s admission of a videotaped interview and several
out-of-court statements made by a child (A.C) who was less than three years
old at the time of the interview and statements. A. C. was found incompetent
to testify at trial, and thus the out of court statements --to her mother,
grandfather and her videotaped interview were admitted at trial as evidence
against her father of child sexual abuse. He was convicted.
This case involves
Indiana’s “protected person” statute, Ind. Code § 35-37-4-6 (1998) which
allows otherwise inadmissible statements to be admitted if the court finds
at a hearing that the declarant is unavailable; the statement concerns an
act that is a material element of certain designated offenses that were
allegedly committed against the person; and that the statement has
sufficient indicia of reliability.
HELD:
Defendant’s conviction
was reversed. The court determined that there was insufficient indicia of
reliability to permit introduction of the child victim’s out-of-court
statements. In an unusual analysis the court compared the facts in the
present case to Pierce v. State, 677 N.E.2d 39 (Ind. 1997). The facts
in Pierce are only similar in that there was a child victim. At
approximately 10 AM on November 18, 1993, Pierce enticed a child to his car
from a Wal-Mart where the child had been shopping with her mother. Pierce
returned her to the store shortly thereafter where she told her mother and,
a few minutes later, arriving sheriff’s officers, that he had unbuckled her
belt and put his hand down her pants. The victim made statements to her
mother on return and then at 2:30 made a videotaped statement to the
sheriff’s department. The court found those statements admissible, reasoning
that the statements were "spontaneous", that they occurred "a very short
time" after the incident, that the child was "still excited" when the
statements were made, and that "there was no time for an adult to plant a
story in her head." In Carpenter, the court found it an abuse of
discretion for the trial court to admit the statements, finding that the
testimony recounting A.C.'s statements to her mother and grandfather and her
videotaped interview failed to exhibit sufficient indications of reliability
as the protected person statute requires because of the combination of the
following circumstances: there was no indication that A.C.'s statements were
made close in time to the alleged molestations, the statements themselves
were not sufficiently close in time to each other to prevent implantation or
cleansing, and A.C. was unable to distinguish between truth and falsehood
Case remanded for
retrial.
Cf. Bugh v. Mitchell,
No. 01-3417, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 9124 (6th Cir. May 13, 2003)
In the context of a
federal habeas corpus proceeding, the defendant challenged the Ohio state
court’s admission of hearsay testimony from four different witnesses in a
child sexual abuse case. The circuit court affirmed the district court’s
denial of habeas.
Hearsay statements from
four adults recounting the incident as described by the four-year-old child
victim were admissible under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay
rule as well as under the non-hearsay rule regarding statements of prior
identification. The statements were admissible even in light of the fact
that the child testified at the trial and most of her responses were
nonverbal. Further, their admission did not constitute a violation of the
Confrontation Clause. The circuit court also affirmed the district court’s
reliance on United States v. Owens, 484 U.S. 554 (1988). The
Owens
Court rejected the idea that the dangers associated with hearsay required
the testimony to be examined for either indicia of reliability or
particularized guarantees of trustworthiness where the declarant is subject
to cross-examination. The court also found the lower court ruling consistent
with two other Supreme Court cases: Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836,
846 (1990) and Idaho v. Wright, 497 U.S. 805 (1990).
|
|
What
Are Pornographic Images of Children?
|
|
National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Reprinted with acknowledgement.
Under federal law, child
pornography1
is
defined as a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon,
sculpture, or painting, photograph, film, video, or computer or
computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic,
mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where it
-
depicts a minor engaging in sexually
explicit conduct and is obscene, or
-
depicts an image that is, or appears to
be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic
abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital,
anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or
opposite sex, and such depiction lacks serious literary, artistic,
political, or scientific value.2
Sexually explicit conduct
includes various forms of sexual activity such as intercourse, bestiality,
masturbation, sadistic or masochistic abuse, and lascivious exhibition of
the genitals.3
It is illegal to possess, distribute, or manufacture these images.
These illegal images can
be presented in various forms including print media; videotape; film;
compact disc, read-only memory (CD-ROM); or digital versatile technology
(DVD)4
and can be transmitted through computer bulletin-board systems (BBS), USENET
Newsgroups, Internet Relay Chat, web-based groups, peer-to-peer technology,
and an array of constantly changing world wide web sites.5
All states and the
District of Columbia have laws concerning child pornography. As a result a
person who violates federal laws concerning these images may also face
additional state charges.
Introduction
The Internet has created
an exciting new world of information and communication for anyone with
access to online services. While this technology offers unparalleled
opportunities for children and adults to learn about the universe we live
in, it has also had an immeasurable impact on the sexual exploitation of
children, specifically the distribution of sexually exploitive images of
children.
The development,
increasing accessibility, and use of home-computer technology has
revolutionized the distribution of these images by increasing the ease and
decreasing the cost of production and distribution especially across
international borders. Computer technology is transforming the production of
these images into a "sophisticated global cottage industry."
6
While the activities of
most pornographers are rather covert, it is not unusual for adults and
children to encounter illegal images while exploring legitimate areas of the
Internet. A current study has estimated that "as much as 20
percent of all pornographic activity on the Internet may involve children";7
however, accurate estimates are difficult to produce since a reliable
methodology to measure the actual extent of these images online has yet to
be devised.8
Nonetheless parents should closely monitor the online activities of their
children and always maintain access to their children's online accounts.
Lasting
Effects of Pornographic Images of Children
It is important to
realize that these images can have a devastating and lasting effect on
children. In addition to any physical injuries they can suffer in the course
of their molestation, such as genital bruising, lacerations, or exposure to
sexually transmitted diseases, child victims can also experience depression,
withdrawal, anger, and other psychological disorders.9
Such effects may
continue into adulthood. For instance women abused as children have
statistically significant higher rates of nightmares, back pain, headaches,
pelvic pain, eating binges, and other similar symptoms.10
Child victims also
frequently experience feelings of guilt and responsibility for the abuse and
betrayal, a sense of powerlessness, and feelings of worthlessness and low
self-esteem.11
These feelings are
often expressed through increased fearfulness and changes in sleep patterns
including re-occurring memories, flashbacks, dreams, and nightmares
associated with posttraumatic stress.12
Younger children
tend to externalize stress by re-enacting sexual activities through play,
while adolescents may experience negative effects on their growing sexuality
as a result of inappropriate early sexual experiences.13
The lives of children
featured in these illegal images are forever altered, not only by the
molestation but by the permanent record of the exploitation. Once sexual
exploitation takes place, the molester may document these encounters on film
or video. This documentation can then become the "ammunition" needed to
blackmail the child into further submission, which is necessary to continue
the relationship and maintain its secrecy. In addition these documented
images allow molesters to "relive" their sexual fantasies with children long
after the exploitation has stopped.
A greater number of child
molesters are now using computer technology to organize and maintain their
collections of these illegal images. In addition they are also using the
Internet to increase the size of these collections. Personally manufactured
illegal images of children are especially valuable on the Internet, which
provides the molester with a respected status among fellow exploiters and
traders of this material. Once this status is achieved, molesters will often
begin to trade images of their own sexual exploits with children among
themselves.
When these images reach
cyberspace, they are irretrievable and can continue to circulate forever.
Thus the child is revictimized as the images are viewed again and again.
Online Predators
Individuals
looking for potential child victims online have no difficulty finding them.
It is quite common for these offenders to frequent "kids only" chat rooms
and communicate with children who unwittingly divulge personal information
about themselves. A more recent phenomenon is the solicitation of sex over
the Internet. A survey conducted by the Crimes against Children Research
Center at the University of New Hampshire found that one in five youth who
regularly use the Internet received a sexual solicitation or approach over
the Internet in 1999.14
After this initial
meeting, child predators will often continue to communicate with the child
electronically or through other means. Some of these individuals may then
attempt to lower the child's inhibitions by gradually introducing sexual
content into their online conversations and even send pornographic images to
the child. When children are shown images of peers engaged in sexual
activities, they are led to believe that this behavior is acceptable. This
lowers their inhibitions and makes it easier for the molester to take
advantage of the child sexually.
Parents are strongly
encouraged to speak openly with their children about online dangers and
monitor their online activities.
End Notes
1As stated by Janis Wolak, Kimberly Mitchell, and David Finkelhor
in Internet Sex Crimes Against Minors: The Response of Law Enforcement
(Alexandria, Virginia: National Center for Missing & Exploited Children,
November 2003, page vii), “The term ‘child pornography,’ because it implies
simply conventional pornography with child subjects, is an inappropriate
term to describe the true nature and extent of sexually exploitive images of
child victims. Use of this term should not be taken to imply that children
‘consented’ to the sexual acts depicted in these photographs; however, it is
the term most readily recognized by the public, at this point in time, to
describe this form of child sexual exploitation. It is used in this
[document] to refer to illegal pictorial material involving children under
the standards developed by statute, case law, and law-enforcement-agency
protocols. It is hoped that a more accurate term will be recognized,
understood, and accepted for use in the near future.”
218
U.S.C. 1466A and 18 U.S.C. 2256.
3Id.
4Eva J. Klain, Heather J. Davies, Molly A. Hicks. Child
Pornography: The Criminal-Justice-System Response, page 1 [hereinafter
Response], citing Daniel S. Armagh, Nick L. Battaglia, and Kenneth V.
Lanning, Use of Computers in the Sexual Exploitation of Children, Office
of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Portable Guides to
Investigating Child Abuse. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
1999, page 6.
5Response, supra note 3, page 1.
6Response, supra note 3, page 3, citing Child
Pornography: An International Perspective, World Congress Against the
Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, Stockholm, Sweden, August 27-31,
1996, page 9.
7Response, supra note 3, page 3, citing Allotted
Day on Child Pornography, 36th Parliament, 1st Session, Edited Hansand
1, No. 172, February 2, 1999, page 12.
8Response, supra note 3, page 3.
9Response, supra note 3, page 10, citing Bentovim
and Bentovim, "The Effects on Children and Their Families" in Organized
Abuse: The Current Debate, page 60-62 [hereinafter Effects on
Children].
10Response, supra note 3, page 10, citing Jeanne
McCauley, David E. Kern, Ken Kolodner, et al., Clinical Characteristics
of Women with a History of Childhood Abuse: Unhealed Wounds, 277 JAMA
1197, page 1362.
11Response, supra note 3, page 10, citing Heather
Y. Swanston, Jennifer S. Tebbutt, Brian I. O'Toole, and R. Kim Oates,
Sexually Abused Children 5 Years After Presentation: A Case-Control Study,
100 Pediatrics, 1997, page 600, 603.
12Response, supra note 3, page 10, citing
Effects on Children, supra note 8, page 60-62.
13Id.
14Response, supra note 3, page 7, citing David
Finkelhor, Kimberly Mitchell, and Janis Wolak, Online Victimization: A
Report on the Nation's Youth. Alexandria, Virginia: National Center for
Missing & Exploited Children, page ix.
|
|
When Multiple Images Of Child Pornography
Are Contained On Single Computer Disk,
Each Image May Be Charged As Separate
Offense.
|
|
When Multiple Images Of Child
Pornography Are Contained On Single Computer Disk, Each Image May Be Charged
As Separate Offense.
On appeal from his conviction of possession of child pornography in
violation of Wis. Stat. § 948.12, the defendant contended that the
thirty-nine counts of possession of child pornography with which he was
charged were multiplicitous. The complaint charged thirty-nine counts based
on the individual images found on the Zip disk removed from the defendant’s
computer. The defendant eventually pleaded no contest to eighteen counts.
He asserted on appeal that all but one charge should be dismissed on
multiplicity grounds.
The court of appeals employs a
two-prong test when analyzing a multiplicity challenge: (1) whether the
charged offenses are identical in law and fact; and (2) if not identical in
law and fact, whether the Legislature nevertheless intended multiple
offenses to be charged as a single count
With respect to the first prong,
it is undisputed that the charges here were identical in law because they
arise under the same statute, Wis. Stat. § 948.12. Thus, the court’s
inquiry focuses on whether the charges were identical in fact.
The defendant argued that the
charges were identical in fact, and therefore multiplicitous, because the
police found all the pornographic photographs on a single computer Zip disk,
and there is no evidence that he acquired each image with a
separate volitional act. The State, relying on State v. Multaler,
2002 WI 35, 252 Wis. 2d 54, 543 N.W.2d 437, submitted that each individual
image may be charged as a separate offense, and the complaint is sufficient
because each charge pertains to a picture of a different child. The court
of appeals agrees with the State that Multaler is dispositive on this
issue.
In Multaler, the Wisconsin
Supreme Court considered a multiplicity challenge to a possession of child
pornography prosecution. The State charged Multaler with seventy-nine
counts, based upon the number of pornographic photographic images retrieved
from his computer. Multaler ultimately pleaded guilty to twenty-eight
counts. On appeal, he argued that the number of computer disks (two)
determined the number of permissible charges for violating Wis. Stat.
§ 948.12, not the number of pornographic images contained on the disks. The
supreme court disagreed and concluded that the charges were not identical in
fact: “Although some of the downloaded image files contained multiple
images, there were more than 28 separate image files. In a statement given
after his arrest, Multaler admitted that he “began downloading . . . in the
winter of 1998,” thus suggesting that he obtained the image files over a
period of time. Even had he downloaded all the image files in a very
short period of time, the fact that there were more than 28 separate files
supports a conclusion that he made a new decision to obtain each one.
Every time he downloaded a new file, he recommitted himself to additional
criminal conduct. Each decision to download more child pornography
represented a new volitional departure.”
The criminal complaint against
the defendant in this case alleged that he possessed thirty-nine separate
image files, each depicting a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct.
Each file is identified by a different name, such as File Aspty.054.jpg,
File Batj07.jpg, File Billi16.jpg, etc. Given these facts, the court of
appeals concludes that, as the supreme court determined in Multaler,
it is reasonable to assume that the existence of multiple files on the Zip
disk demonstrates that the defendant made a new decision to download a
particular image file. Therefore, each image file “represent[s] a new
volitional departure,” and the charges against the
defendant are different in fact.
Turning to the second prong of the multiplicity
test, the defendant argued that the Legislature intended only one offense
regardless of the number of images on a computer disk. The court of appeals
notes that “Multaler considered and rejected this argument, and we,
of course, are bound by the supreme court’s precedent.” In Multaler,
the court held that the intended unit of prosecution under Wis. Stat.
§ 948.12 is each pornographic image; the manner in which the images were
stored does not dictate the number of charges.
State v. Schaefer, 2003 WI App 164 (Wis. Ct. App., No. 01-2691-CR,
publication ordered August 27, 2003).
|
|
G.A.T.E. (GANG AWARENESS TRAINING EDUCATION)
|
| By
Officer Robert Tornabene
The attacks on September 11th, 2001 showed
that our nation’s soil was not immune to Terrorism. Since World War II a
foreign enemy had not attacked us on our own soil. Over the years many
Americans have become complacent. Even with September 11th, we have
forgotten the tragedy that occurred on that fateful day. Perhaps it is
because we have short memory spans, or we are too busy with our own
individual lives. But what we should all understand is that as a result of
what are country represents, individually or collectively we are all
targets.
One fifth of the Nations population,
approximately 74 million people are in American schools five days a week .
In the last ten years we have seen young people smuggle firearms into and
out of schools and kill other students. We saw the ultimate example of this
on April 19, 1999 when two students entered Columbine High School in
Littleton Colorado killing 12 students, a teacher and then both committed
suicide. This attack, while carried out by teenagers, involved automatic
weapons, military tactics, and explosive devices. These two teenagers kept
several hundred police officers at bay because law enforcement never foresaw
an event of this nature occurring in a school. What would happen if the
attack were a coordinated attack, by well-trained fanatical terrorists with
the right weapons, plans, and explosives? Then multiply that by simultaneous
attacks on four, five or twenty schools regionally or nationally. What would
happen?
Similar to the events immediately following
September 11th, the federal government closed down the airplane industry and
brought the military into to protect the airline passengers. The quickest
way to strike fear into Americans is to attack their children. After a
series of coordinated attacks, parents fearing for the safety of their
children would do what any parents would do, attempt to protect them. It
would result in an immediate drop off in the work force as parents stayed
home to take care of their children. If conservatively there are 53 million
students in school and roughly fifty percent were from two parent homes that
would imply that 25 million American parents potentially would drop out of
the work force. This estimate is a conservative estimate at best.
The initial slow down in worker output,
production and services would pale in comparison to what would happen next.
Just after September 11th, unemployment skyrocketed to 5.4 percent according
to the department of labor and presently the U.S. unemployment rate is at
6.5% (May 2004 BLS). Removing 25 million Americans from our labor force
would push the unemployment rate up to 21.8%. At the height of the Great
Depression, unemployment was at 24.9% which, took approximately five years
to reach that level. The effects that would impact our country in such a
short period of time would be cataclysmic.
The rapid removal from the work force would
have a ripple effect across the economy. There would be a first initial wave
of affected workers, which would follow with multiple waves as the economy
began to tumble. Initially, those that would be affected are teachers,
administrators, janitorial staff and administrative support staff. Next
would be food service staff, grounds staff, book suppliers, clothing
suppliers, office suppliers, bus drivers, bus companies, HVAC staff and
vending and food service suppliers. The next impact would be across the
board from the actual parents who elected to leave the work force to stay
home with their children. Initially this would point to the service
industry, manufacturing, office staff, and other technical type staff.
Ultimately impacting the professional workforce as time went on.
Lt. Col Dave Grossman, a well-known expert
on military tactics, history, violence and terrorism believes that the
response from the federal government would be similar to what was done with
the airline industry. Grossman states that before people would feel safe
sending their children to school the government would have to recruit and
train police officers to be placed inside every school in America. Grossman
believes that this will take at least a year to complete such a monumental
task. Certainly, the impact of hiring at least several hundred thousand
officers into the work force will be financial burden for all municipalities
already cash strapped. Certainly, the federal government would have to step
in to either nationalize the police forces of the nation, or create a whole
national school police force. The government will have to fund the hiring
and training of those officers to protect the nation’s young people.
So
why Schools?
Intelligence information that has been
gathered suggests that as High profile targets are made less accessible, so
called “Soft” targets become a more likely target. Historically terrorist
attacks have attempted not to involve innocents, particularly children.
However, over the years there has been a change in how terrorists attempt to
produce terror and fear and that has been by attacking children. In Israel,
numerous homicide bombers have targeted school buses, killing hundreds of
students since the mid 1990’s. Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed
numerous children who were in the first floor of the Murrah Federal Building
when their bomb went off. Besides this change in the Middle East there has
also been a religious justification that has taken a strong foothold among
Muslims extremists. An al Qaeda spokes man named Suleiman abu Ghaith has
stated “We have the right to kill four million Americas – two million of
them children – and exile twice as many and injure and cripple hundreds of
thousands. We have the right to fight them with chemical and biological
weapons, so they catch fatal and unusual diseases that Muslims have caught
due to their (US) chemical and biological weapons.”
In addition, according the IntelCenter, al
Qaeda has committed over seventy percent of there successful terrorist
attacks between the months of August and November. Since, schools are in
session all over the country during these months, it points to schools as an
obvious target especially when you consider the comments of Sulieman abu
Ghaith about killing and maiming two million children.
Shortly after the United States invaded
Afghanistan, a cache of videotapes and intelligence information was gathered
by intelligence agents on the ground. These tapes were videotapes of
terrorist training, similar to the way high school coaches review the
previous week’s football game for teaching purposes. On these tapes however,
were terrorists invading a school. In the video were classrooms setup with
desks, cardboard cutouts of children in seats and teachers standing up in
the classroom.
Former Green Beret Jack Idema found the
tapes as a contracted advisor for the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan while
working for the Central Intelligence Agency. His discoveries lead to
homeland security reevaluating numerous security procedures for executive
protection. “Knowing al Qaeda trained to take out a presidential motorcade
or an office building is scary, but nothing is more frightening than their
training to take over a school,” said Idema, “In a classroom in a camp near
Jalalabad, we found little desks with bullet holes in them and the back of
chairs. Each had seven or eight bullet holes in them. They were definitely
aiming to hit critical mass.”
This desire and apparent justification to
kill two million children appears to directly target American’s children.
What better a place to attack then a school where as many children as
possible are present. Even Osama bin Laden made a comment about crippling
the economy of the United States in a videotaped interview with the Muslim
News Station al-Jazeera on December 26, 2001. During that taping he stated
“It is important to hit the economy [of the US], which is the base of its
military power…If the economy is hit they will become reoccupied.” This
would directly bolster the theory that by attacking our schools in series of
coordinated attacks would have the desired impact that al Qaeda wants.
Al Qaeda apparently has a desire to hit
America again, and hit us hard. Our schools in the United States are better
prepared since 9/11, but they are far softer targets and have a higher
“value” than most other targets in the United States. School districts have
been in financial crunches since prior to September 11th, attempting to
provide the appropriate security necessary to protect all of our children
would be an even greater financial burden, meaning some tough cost cutting
measures would have to be enacted. The times we are in right now do not
allow for miss steps and errors of judgment because we could not “think out
of the box.” If September 11th was an attempt to cripple our financial
strength, then the next attack will be designed to destroy our will to fight
the “War on Terror” while simultaneously cutting our nations financial legs
out from under us.
|
|
2005 Wisconsin
Act 5
“Amie’s Law”
On
May 17, 2005, Governor Jim Doyle signed 2005 Wisconsin Act 5 changing the
rules for releasing a juvenile’s information from the sex offender registry.
Under this new law, a sheriff or police chief can release information on an
adjudicated or minor sex offender in the sex offender registry to an
organization including schools, day care providers and certain governmental
agencies; individuals or the general public if the release is determined to
be necessary to protect the public.
In
October of 2006, Governor Doyle directed the Department of Corrections to
begin posting dangerous adults on the public sex offender registry who had
committed sexual offenses as juveniles.
2005
Wisconsin Act 5 does not provide any statutory guidelines to law enforcement
agencies to help them determine when an adjudicated minor registrant poses a
risk to public safety which makes it necessary to publicly release
information about the registrant.
The
Department of Corrections contacted Dr. Anna Salter who reviewed current
research, literature and risk assessment on juvenile sex offenders. Dr.
Salter then developed a set of guidelines with a format similar to the adult
Special Bulletin Notification. The guidelines use factors that current
research shows to be the most important to public safety concerns. These
guidelines are not a risk assessment, but rather a tool that law enforcement
can use to structure discussions surrounding a youth’s risks, victim and
family impact, and community safety.
Act 5 Guidelines
For Use with DOC-2342
1. Number of Charged
Sexual Offenses Including the Current Adjudication
Count all charged sexual offenses, misdemeanors or felonies, which occurred
prior to age 18. Include the most recent offenses in addition to charges
for attempted sex offenses prior to age 18.
2. Number of known
sexual abuse or sex assault victims
This
item only looks at the number of known victims, not at whether the person
was ever charged with the offenses. Use any reliable source
3. Duration of sexual
offending history, from first known to current offense
This
item does not require formal charges. However, it does require that the
information be from a reliable source.
4. Other Nonsexual,
Antisocial Behaviors
The
definition addresses all nonsexual, antisocial behaviors that may include:
vandalism, vagrancy, truancy, fighting/battery, carrying a weapon, theft,
reckless driving, driving under the influence, assault, burglary, robbery,
and using or selling drugs, etc. Formal charges are not necessary.
5. Any Stranger
Victims
This
item is defined by whether there were prior interactions between the victim
and offender that both were aware of, and happened at least 24 hours before
the assault. For example, an offender might “know” a victim by stalking
her, but if the victim did not know the offender she is still defined as a
stranger. In addition, if the offender intended to assault a stranger, but
the victim happened to know the offender, the victim is still considered a
stranger.
The
“24 hour” rule applies to situations where the offenders may meet a victim
in a bar, for example, and spend hours with them before luring the victim
somewhere to be assaulted. In this situation, the victim is still
considered to be a stranger. Only a slight degree of knowing is enough to
make the victim not a stranger. For example, if the offender worked in a
convenience store and the victim came in several times to buy something, the
victim is not classified as a stranger.
6. Evidence of
Deviant Sexual Arousal
This
item requires evidence that the offender is sexually aroused by prepubescent
children, violence, or fear. Three or more prepubescent victims would
generally be considered evidence of a deviant arousal pattern.
Self-reported fantasies of sex with children would count as well.
Child-victim grooming patterns would suggest that prepubescent children were
not just victims of opportunity.
To
establish a sexual interest in violence, the rater would have to be
convinced that the offender was not just interested in sex and the
willingness to use violence to obtain sex. Rather, it should be evident
that the offender becomes aroused by the violence itself and had a specific
sexual interest in forced sex. In addition, evidence that the offender
becomes sexually aroused by torture or victim fear would meet the definition
of a deviant arousal pattern.
7. Deception,
Planning and Grooming
This
item reflects forethought and planning prior to the offense. It is evidenced
by grooming behavior, manipulation of the victim or her/his family, or use
of deception to obtain access to the victim. At its extreme, it may include
a set modus operandi which is consistent across victims. However, there may
also be more moderate levels of manipulation which reflect a prior intent to
offend. Victims are generally pre-determined and are not victims of
opportunity. An example of an exception might be an offender who pretends
his car had broken down with the intent of assaulting any female who stops
to help. This reflects planning and deception, even though the specific
victim was a victim of opportunity.
8. Treatment
Is Juvenile Compliant or
Non-Compliant. Being terminated from treatment is a clear indicator of risk
in adolescents and adults. However, in Wisconsin DOC, juveniles are
required to stay in treatment and are not terminated. Therefore,
noncompliance with treatment must be measured in other ways: e.g.,
individual is frequently removed from treatment because he is serving time
in segregation for infractions.
9. Stability of current
living situation
A
stable living situation may consist of one or two parents/guardians, or it
may consist of a group home, foster care, or an independent living
situation. Stability is not characterized by the type of living situation,
but by whether or not the situation frequently changes in major and
unpredictable ways and if there is continuity of adequate care and
supervision. If the offender is in and out of the home because of his
behavior, the living situation itself may still be stable.
Frequent moves, constantly changing adults in the home, caretaker mental
illness, drug addiction or spousal batteries would all be examples of an
unstable living situation. Other examples of unstable living situations may
include if the offender is placed in and out of the home because the family
becomes homeless, a parent cycles in and out of jail, a caretaker abandons
the family and then returns, or because a caretaker relapses into drugs and
the offender must periodically live with others.
10. Positive support
system
This item measures the
amount of positive support the offender has in the community. It could
include family members, foster family members, friends, teachers, mentors,
coaches, therapists, or others outside the home. Institutional
organizations such as a church community or youth organization may also be a
positive support system for the offender.
Document 2342 and the definitions for the Act 5 guidelines can be found at
http://www.wi-doc.com/index_juvenile.htm |
|
“Preparing for School Attacks”
by Richard Fairburn and David Grossman
Reprinted
with permission of the POLICE MARKSMAN magazine
For those in the
emergency response community who thought school attacks were a thing of the
past, the recent active shooter incident in Montreal, Canada, and disrupted
attack in Green Bay, Wisconsin signaled a loud wake-up call. Just a few days
later, hostages were taken in a school in Bailey, Colorado with tragic
results and a principle was killed by a student in a Sauk County, Wisconsin
high school. The Bailey, Colorado incident was horribly ironic in that a
SWAT team from neighboring Jefferson County (the agency in charge of the
Columbine response) was called upon to make the hostage rescue assault.
Our school children are
at risk from both angry students and determined terrorists. After the
Columbine high school attack of 1999, many police agencies adopted and
trained some form of “Rapid Deployment” tactic for responding to an active
shooter. But, with lack of use and the memory fade induced by time, many
departments have allowed their “edge” to become dull. We must program school
protection permanently onto our emergency response hard drives.
Understand the Problem
At the end of the 20th
Century, the United States suffered a number of high-profile school attacks
perpetrated by students. The Columbine attack made the most national news,
but was only one of a significant string of violent assaults that continue
today.
The police response to a
school attack committed by a student or students is a daunting task.
Confusion and panic are rampant at these events and merely identifying and
locating the attacker(s) can be a huge problem. However, few of these
attackers are hardened killers. In several cases they were brought under
control, putting a stop to the killing, with nothing more than verbal
commands from an authority figure. The boys at Columbine had trained
themselves well enough to exchange gunfire with the police and even clear a
malfunctioning weapon to get back in the fight. But, most school and
workplace shooters are seeking easy targets, not a gunfight.
The world watched what
happened September 1, 2004, at Beslan, Russia with stunned disbelief, but it
has happened in many other nations. Turkey has had over 300 schools
destroyed by terrorist attacks. Pakistan, Algeria, and many other nations,
in addition to Russia, have experienced brutal school massacres committed by
terrorist groups. The groups perpetrating these attacks shared common
motivations ... the same motivations that brought us the attacks of
September 11, 2001.
One of the most tragic
and devastating terrorist acts in Israel was the Ma'alot school massacre in
1974 in which 21 Israeli children were murdered in a brutal terrorist act
that set the stage for many subsequent attacks on schools. As a result of
this incident, Israel has lived for thirty years with armed security in
every school, armed guards on every field trip and sporting event, armored
busses and armed security on those busses. Can anyone comprehend what it
would cost the United States to have that kind of security for every school,
every field trip and every bus in America? You think your school, city,
state or nation has budget problems now?
Col. Grossman (one of the
authors of this article) co-authored an article published in the Harvard
Journal of Law and Public Policy, which stated that if a series of active
shooter terrorist attacks happened in the US, as they have in Israel, we
will arm our selves and get on with life – just like Israel. But, you can't
arm the kids! Even Israel can't arm its children. If a major terrorist
attack on a school is successful, the terrorists can impact every family and
every school in America, disrupting our economy and way of life unlike any
other conventional attack. It is our job to prevent that and to protect our
kids.
A police response to a
terrorist attack may need to be very different from what would work with a
incident committed by students. In an August 2002 Pakistani incident, one
armed guard drove off four armed terrorists attacking a Christian school. On
the contrary, the attackers at Beslan in 2004, were heavily armed and
determined to achieve a huge body count ... which they accomplished. One
well armed responder might drive off or delay a small-scale terrorist
attack, but a well prepared terrorist team could overwhelm all but a
military-level response team. The possibility of terrorists in the United
States assembling 30 armed attackers without detection is very remote, but
even this remote possibility must be taken into consideration.
The sky is NOT falling.
This is only one of many things terrorists could do to us. If we over react;
if we change our way of life because of the threat of school massacres, then
we give way to fear and the terrorists get the victory they desire without
having to fire a shot. So, we must strike a balance between preparing for an
unthinkable horror without giving way to unreasoned fear. We must respond
with a balanced and reasoned "all hazards" approach to this threat. The odds
of a school attack in your community are admittedly low. The odds of any
given police officer being shot making a traffic stop today are also low,
yet we train for that eventuality on a regular basis. If the risk is high,
we must train and prepare, no matter the likelihood. To ignore the threat is
to live in denial. Consider these “Five D’s:”
In order to avoid falling victim to DENIAL:
-
DETER - Have alert,
visible and armed security on site. Train and equip response teams to a
high standard and make their capabilities known (though the details of
their response techniques should remain classified). Convince the
potential attacker they won’t succeed in killing innocent targets if they
come to your locale.
-
DETECT - Like
Detectives, be ever vigilant for “clues.” Virtually every school attacker,
student or terrorist, conducts extensive reconnaissance of their target.
They will analyze the availability of ingress and egress points. Questions
will be asked about the site’s security preparations. They may photograph
and/or sketch the area. Both human and video surveillance can help you
pattern these recon missions.
-
DELAY - Harden the
target with security checkpoints and random security patrols. Drill
lockdown procedures to remove easy targets from their potential kill zone.
Make sure the lock-down procedure includes the means to lock the doors to
areas of refuge. Avoid the urge to evacuate anyone into an area not proven
to be safe from potential snipers or bombs.
-
DESTROY - If they still
choose your site as their target ... you must respond quickly and
forcefully. An analysis of active shooter incidents by co-Author Richard
Fairburn suggests that even a Rapid Deployment team is unlikely to
assemble in time to save lives.(1) In most incidents, the only chance
available to save lives is an instant response by on-scene personnel or
the first arriving officer. At this point we are not just seeking to
defeat the attackers. One of the lessons of the 2004 Russain school
massacre, as outlined in John Giduck's excellent book, "Terror at Beslan"
is that we must attack immediately, with maximum violence, and no
intention of pulling back or giving up ground. Attack the enemy hard and
fast and DESTROY them before they destroy more innocents.
Make a Plan
Since very little
innovative thinking occurs under combat conditions, we must plan and train
for the next fight before we’re in it. Rapid Deployment tactics are a prime
example. Some have criticized the actions of the police responders at
Columbine, yet no police agency in the country had ever anticipated a school
attack of that magnitude ... until it happened. The responders at Columbine
reacted as they had been trained and, quite frankly, the complications of
that incident might not have allowed a significantly different response
irregardless of their training.
Most schools and response
agencies now strongly recommend a policy of “lockdown.” When we consider how
both fire alarms and bomb threats have been used to evacuate victims into
the “kill zone” of a prepared outside ambush, perhaps a lockdown is the best
initial response to any school threat. Lockdown drills, like fire drills,
are now mandated for schools in some states.
Pre-plan your site.
Staging Areas, Command Post locations and Reunification Sites should be
pre-determined. All resources scheduled to respond to your school should be
part of periodic drills ... actual hands-on drills, not tabletop exercises.
Choose and Train your
People Well
Armed security in your
school will go far to deter an attack, but if an attack comes, these
officers may be the first to be targeted. So, we need a certain type of
officer as a School Resource Officer (SRO). At the risk of insulting some,
we must state a fact. Some officers are assigned to schools because they are
ineffective on the street. Choose your best officers to protect your most
valuable property ... your children. SROs must be intelligent, alert,
inquisitive and congenial, yet be ready to shift into “combat mode” in an
instant. We need “sheepdogs” to protect our “lambs.” Warriors, not wimps
guarding our children.
Train your SROs to
respond effectively to a threat either alone or as a two-officer team,
joining up with the first arriving patrol officer. Consider the
controversial option of pre-positioning protective gear and a carbine for
these officers in a secure on-site location. We owe these guardians the best
survival odds we can provide.
Train Rapid Deployment
techniques to the rest of your department. This training should be as
stressful and realistic as possible including difficult surroundings, live
role players and paintball-type gunfight simulations. Team training must be
refreshed at least annually to maintain these perishable skills.
Train your first-line
supervisors to quickly take command at a school violence incident. The
supervisor’s first duty is to conduct a rapid problem assessment and sort
through the confusing flood of initial intelligence. Their quick analysis of
the situation will drive a hasty risk assessment to determine if a response
by a single officer or Rapid Deployment team has a chance to reach and
neutralize an active shooter. In most cases, we must take immediate action
to stop the killing. However, if the on-scene commander identifies a
situation like Beslan, with numerous, heavily armed attackers, a delaying
action may be the best he can achieve with limited resources. Adding
responder bodies to the pile in a noble, yet futile gesture may make the
problem even worse.
Stay Vigilant
Once you scale up your
school security preparations and response plans, keep them current. Motivate
your people to stay sharp and be alert. School attacks, like other violent
crimes, tend to ebb and flow in their frequency. We are all shocked back to
a high state of awareness after an attack occurs, but the calm periods may
require even more vigilance. Our enemies use the lulls to conduct
reconnaissance and plan their moves. Remember the DETER and DETECT aspects
of our Five “D”s.
The situation is very
much like fire protection. The probability of a student being killed or
seriously injured by violence is significantly greater than the probability
of being killed or seriously injured by fire. No child has been killed by
school fire in North America in over a quarter of a century, but in the
2004/2005 school year, 48 people were murdered in American schools. These
are usually random acts of violence, or shootings by students as opposed to
acts of terrorism, but the defense against terrorist attacks in our schools,
as outlined in this article, is largely the same as the defense against
school shootings.
Thus, our children are
dozens of times more likely to be killed by violence than fire, and
thousands of times more likely to be seriously injured by violence as
compared to fire. Yet, in any school you can look around and see fire
sprinklers, smoke alarms, fire exits, and fire extinguishers. If we can
spend all that money and time preparing for fire (and we should, since every
life is precious) shouldn't we spend time and money preparing for the thing
that is far more likely to kill or injure a child?
The most negligent, unprofessional, obscene words anyone can ever say are:
"It will never happen here." When someone asks, "Do you really think there
will be a terrorist act or a school shooting here?" Just point to the fire
exit and say, "Do you really think there will be a fire here?” No, we don't
think there will ever be a fire here. But we would be morally, criminally
negligent if we did not prepare for the possibility. And the same is far,
far truer of school violence."
About a month after the
9-11 terrorist attacks Col. Grossman was training a group of special
operations troops who were headed to Afghanistan. A Special Forces (Green
Beret) sergeant came up during one of the breaks and said, "Colonel, we're
going to Afghanistan, and we're gonna kick their tails. While we're over
there, you tell all those folks you teach, don't let them come kill our
kids."
Our servicemen are over there dying for us every day, trying to keep the
terrorists on the defense, or as one Marine put it, "To keep it ta hell over
there!" The troops believe in what they are doing, and they only ask one
thing: "Watch my back and do your job ... don't let them come kill my kids."
THAT is what this article is about, and THAT is what WE should be about.
Every day, millions of
parents hug millions of kids, their most precious possessions, and send
those kids to school, trusting US to keep them alive. So don't just read
this article and the books recommended here(2), apply them! Be like the
firefighter: put the risk in perspective, pray that it will never happen,
know that it COULD happen, and work with all your heart and soul to prevent
it from happening.
It could be YOUR child or
grandchild's life that you save.
(1) Report: “Rapid
Deployment as a response to an Active Shooter Incident,” Illinois State
Police Academy, 2003.
(2) Michael and Chris Dorn's book "Innocent Targets" is required reading for
those who would like more information on terrorist attacks on schools in
many nations. For more in depth information about the most recent and
horrific school massacre in Beslan, Russia, John Giduck's definitive book,
"Terror at Beslan" is essential reading.
|
|
“Preventing Violence in Our Schools”
By Dave Grossman & Loren Christensen
Re-printed with permission from Lt. Col. Dave Grossman of Killology Research
Group.
"To state the obvious, times have changed in our schools. In
our day, we had to contend with a thrown egg in an assembly or the theft of
the school mascot. Today, hit lists of teachers and classmates circulate at
middle schools and deadly weapons are confiscated from book bags and
lockers. What was once unimaginable, that a school, society’s ultimate
sanctuary, could become a killing field is now a grim reality." (Tamara
Jones, 1998)
Police
Officer in the Halls
A key deterrent to preventing violence in our schools is to put a police
officer in the halls. We know that a terrorist, whether he is a school
shooter or an international terrorist, is not looking for a fair fight,
because if he were, he would go to a police station where there are lots of
armed officers perfectly willing to oblige him. While there are the
occasional incidents where a gunman seeks out police officers in the hope
that they will kill him, a terrorist wanting to garner an impressive body
count in this new, international game will never go to a place populated by
professional, armed warriors.
The same is true of the corrections community. We take the
distilled essence of all the people no one else in America wants to live
with, we pack them all in one place and we make our corrections officers
live with them every day. These officers live in an environment that makes
the post office look like nirvana, but they never go “postal.” No one ever
tries to shoot their fellow corrections employees, and the obvious reason is
because of all those other officers in the towers armed with heavy-duty
firepower. Clearly, a police station and a prison are not places to try to
butcher innocent people and rack up a high score, nor would a school be the
place to go when there is an armed police officer present acting as a
deterrent. The kind of pathetic losers who commit these acts seldom go to
places where there are people present who can shoot back.
When we put an officer in the school, it becomes a key factor
that makes it possible to keep our kids alive. At this writing, a panel of
state legislators and legal officials in Virginia are recommending that a
police officer or sheriff's deputy be posted at every middle and high school
in the state (Christina Nuckols, 2001). It is not a failsafe and it is not a
guarantee, but it is one of the most important things that we can do in this
day and age. Here is one other advantage to having a police officer in our
schools. Let’s say you are an educator and there is a kid with a gun in the
hall. Unless it is an absolute emergency, unless shots are being fired and
no one else can do it, as an unarmed educator you should not attempt to
confiscate a gun, or any type of weapon. In that situation there exists what
is called “force inequity.” When Mrs. Adams, walks up and says, “Jimmy, give
me the gun,” he feels shame giving it to you. But when an armed, uniformed
officer approaches the kid and asks for the weapon, there is no shame in
handing the gun to a superior power.
There can be no doubt that a police presence in our schools
deters violence. Case in point: In August of 1999, a 37-year-old neo-Nazi
named Buford Furrow Jr. walked into the North Valley Jewish Community Center
in Los Angels and fired 70 rounds from an AR-15 Bushmaster, hitting five
children. During his escape, he killed a Filipino letter carrier. The
objective in his twisted mind was to send out a wake-up call for America to
kill Jews. In his search to find vulnerable targets, Furrow first scouted
three other prominent Jewish institutions to attack, but he found that each
of them had a security guard present. Later, when he left the freeway in
search of a gas station, he inadvertently found the Valley Jewish Community
Center. That one was unguarded.
What is
the profile of a school shooter?
Say we have a police officer in every school and all the educators are
watchful for problems. What is it that they need to look out for? One of our
authors, Col. Grossman, was a co-trainer with the Secret Service when they
released their interim report on the profile of a school killer. It was not
extensive for the simple reason that there is no specific profile. The
killers are white, Native American, African American, and Hispanic. They are
upper class, middle class, and lower class. They are from broken families
and intact families. While most are males, several are female. There is no
profile--although the FBI research says that a "fascination with violent
media" is a common factor with all the school shooters.
The Secret Service does say that are indicators that a kid is
thinking about killing before he acts. And when a kid indicates that he is
thinking about committing a violent act, and an adult does not take decisive
action to stop him, the Secret Service says that the kid sees this as
getting “permission to proceed.” In an attempted, but fortunately averted
school massacre in New Bedford, Massachusetts, one of the kids arrested had
written on his bedroom wall, "I hate the world," "Everyone must die," and
"Kill everyone." Still, his mother continued to portray the charges as a
misunderstanding that has targeted “great
kids.” It is the job of teachers, parents, and police officers to hone in on
these indicators. Here are two other case studies.
Permission to Proceed
A Mississippi sheriff told me of a boy who wrote a school paper about a kid
who poisoned everyone in his family. The boy included lots of details, such
as how he would do it and how it would feel. When he finished, he turned in
his writing for a grade, and the teacher gave him one, too; in fact, she
gave him a good one. Sadly, the story does not end there. Shortly after he
had turned in the paper, he stole cyanide from the school laboratory and
used it to kill his entire family. By not taking action upon seeing the
boy’s terrible paper, the teacher inadvertently gave him permission to
proceed.
What if he had turned in a school paper full of sexual
ideation, an intimate, detailed paper about having sex with everyone in his
family? Do you think the teacher would have bought off on that? Teachers are
required by law in most places to report such a thing. What if he had turned
in a paper full of suicidal ideation, intimate detail about committing
suicide and how he had given all of his possessions away? Do you think the
teacher would have taken that to the counselor, and the counselor would have
called the parents to inform them of a suicide risk with their child? Of
course. So what is the lesson here? Suicidal ideation and sexual ideation by
children are out, but homicidal ideation gets an “A.” That is the sick
double, tragic standard that is hurting us.
Another example of kids getting permission to proceed occurred
at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado. Two high school students
were given an assignment to shoot a video, so they taped themselves wearing
black trench coats as they walked through their school with toy guns
pretending to shoot fellow students. Afterwards, they turned the video in
for a grade and, you guessed it, the teacher gave them a good one.
Afterwards, she wondered if there could be a problem, as thoughts of places
like Pearl, Paducah, Jonesboro, and Springfield floated about in her mind.
So she informed the principal, but still no action was taken, other than to
give the boys a good grade. Shortly thereafter, the boys committed the
largest school massacre in American history -- and the school had given them
permission to proceed.
| |