Fantino's flawed kiddie-porn crusade
ANALYSIS / Accused are convicted in fickle court of public opinion
James Dubro / Toronto / Friday, February 27, 2009
Share |

Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) commissioner Julian Fantino has frequently paraded his law-and-order issues before media, especially when talking about so-called sex crimes.

Gay men will remember Fantino from a press conference in 1994, while he was chief in London, at which he posed with some 800 videotapes seized from the apartment of a local teacher. The tapes were presented as a huge cache of child porn, evidentiary of a vast organized network of kiddie-diddling enthusiasts.

"This seizure and the resulting investigation will no doubt lead to many cities and towns throughout the province," read a London police press release then. "Experience has shown us that this serious problem goes well beyond London. It is a widespread, underground connection of individuals who indiscriminately victimize children for their own pleasure."

Of course in the end that seizure led nowhere. The tapes were not kiddie porn at all. The man was charged with possession of child porn for other materials found in his apartment but prosecutors later withdrew the charges.

Now on Feb 6, surrounded by police brass from 18 Ontario police forces, Fantino announced to the media that 31 men and boys had been arrested in what he called the "largest bust for child porn in Ontario history."

This is almost word for word what he said a year ago, almost to the day, when he announced in a similar media extravaganza the arrests of 22 men and one woman in what he called "the largest bust for porn in Ontario history." At that press conference he also gave "fair warning to paedophiles."

"You can run but you cannot hide," he thundered. "We will stop at nothing to hunt down child predators and eliminate the threat they pose to our children and our community."

Among the names of alleged paedophiles released by Fantino in 2008 was that of a Toronto man who police later said was not charged or suspected at all. They included his name on the list in error. By the time the OPP issued a correction several media outlets had published the man's name. Naturally the subsequent corrections and apologies did not earn the same media coverage as the original story.

Many of those arrested, both in 2008 and 2009, were children or juveniles themselves. In fact in the most-recent bust at least four of those charged are between the ages of 14 and 18 and three are young men between 20 and 24. The mainstream press reports that one of those men is a 20-year-old Olympic archer, his career and future now forever blemished regardless of the outcome of his trial. A whopping 25 percent of those caught up in this dragnet of alleged child pornographers are young men in their teens and early 20s.

It is almost impossible for journalists to evaluate the validity and strength of the recent spate of child porn arrests because few details have been made public, except for sensational tidbits leaked by police about the alleged abuse of a four-year-old boy and 12-year-old girl who police say they rescued from their father.

None of the people arrested in 2008 and 2009 have faced trial yet let alone been found guilty but police and the media often throw the presumption of innocence out the window.

"As a researcher on sex panics one of my fundamental concerns is the ability for researchers to independently scrutinize the evidence brought before the accused," says York PhD socio-logy student Robert Teixeira. "Media reports of child pornography investigations often employ vague and problematic language to describe the evidence, secure in the fact that the ability for an assessment of their claims by independent researchers will be blocked. The evidence of child porn investigations are black-boxed in this way and this is, to my knowledge, unique in the procedures of criminal investigations."

At the 2008 press conference Fantino touted software that supposedly allows investigators to indentify the IP addresses of personal computers sharing kiddie porn over the internet. The software was developed by Wyoming policeman Flint Waters.

In 2008 the OPP said Waters had identified 205,000 unique IP addresses across Canada — including 63,000 across Ontario with 4,000 in Toronto — that were used to trade kiddie porn. Police said they turned up 98 suspects across Canada, including thousands of suspects under surveillance from 30 countries.

Xtra has attempted to contact Waters to ask how the software works and how it recognizes bits of child porn in the teeming digital static of the internet. Waters has never responded to our inquiries.

"They use software to build a database of activity and relationships," says CBC technology analyst Jesse Hirsh. "I would bet that this past bust resulted from a network that all arrested were on. However that's speculation."

Hirsh believes that police investigations on child porn could be a slippery slope.

"Law enforcement is using child porn investigations as a template and it is a turning point for law enforcement and the internet," says Hirsh. "Child porn investigations make it politically possible for the cops to do surveillance on the internet. It is culturally acceptable to do it for child porn in investigations. It is a test case for policing online."

There is little doubt that Fantino would like to hunt down and prosecute every one of these possible child pornographers, but even a moral crusader of Fantino's mettle needs real evidence not just hypotheses and computer tracking reports to proceed with charges and get convictions in the real world of the Ontario criminal justice system.


Share |


Reader Comments


 
Bravo.
It is good to finally start reading articles on this subject that are objective. While I wholeheartedly agree that we need to catch these predators, there needs to be some kind of leash put on these crusading teams that seem to have the ability to override most fundamental aspects of criminal law. They do it with smiles, because the hype and morality of their crusades almost always prevail. Even a guilty suspect would have an excellent shot at beating these type of charges simply by having a decent defense attorney because the officers are complacent in feeling they are above normal fundamentals of law merely due to the nature of the offense and the public hype and ignorance of the different aspects. Anyone who takes police media releases or buzz statements at face value really need to wake up. Recent articles that I have read have shown that the largest producers of "child" porn are actually teenagers taking photographs of themselves and each other. By criminalizing their modern takes on sexuality we are really causing a lot of misappropriated damage.
Dave H, Winnipeg Manitoba
03/01/09 6:39 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Your facts are wrong
Of the 2008 arrests, 2 of the 3 accused in Ottawa have plead guilty and have been sentenced to between 6 and 9 months respectively for the charges laid. One last accused remains and will either go to trial or plead. I don't know about the other Ontario Cities but I have watched the Ottawa cases closely. Dave....I don't know where your getting your facts from but your way off the mark in the comments regarding not only who is producing child porn but also the technology to catch the predators. Thanks Peter
Peter, Ottawa Ontario
03/01/09 8:29 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Yet another convicted
Here is yet another one convicted of the 22 arrested in 2008. http://www.saultstar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1454896 Cheers Peter
Peter, Ottawa Ontario
03/01/09 8:33 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Perhapsso
Peter, in re-reading my post and yours as well, perhaps I am being a bit hasty to say that the largest producers of "child" porn are actually teenagers. Whether they are the largest or not, they are in the stats. We have labeled these crimes and penciled our laws to a one size fits all solution, and clearly this is not a one size fits all crime. I really did not comment on the different technologies used in investigating these crimes. Years ago we learned through our drug laws that going after the end user vs the supplier was futile at best, and a huge misappropriation of resources and punishments. Yet the largest amount of cases we read about deal with mere possession. Lets face it, our crusade isn't working. It is misguided, and the public are constantly mislead by the very people we entrust to enforce these laws. I am not satisfied that a guilty plea is a true test of law, due to the fact that our legal system is not equally available to all, contrary to constitutional mythology. In these type of cases, there is absolutely no presumption of innocence. They are immediately removed from their homes, jobs, and if released are given sets of restrictions that would simply not hold up in court for any other type of crime. Heaven forbid any one of us find ourselves on the receiving end of this lopsided section of our criminal justice system by accident, by grudge or any other less than guilty manner.
Dave H, Winnipeg MB
03/02/09 1:37 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Guilty Pleas and the Justice System
Dave...you are right in stating that teenagers are in the stats and rightfully so. A law is a law and if an 15 year old tries to download images of another 15 year old nude then it labelled Child Porn..as it should be as most times the images and videos are taken in a hostile manner and they are all victims. As for guilty pleas and the justice systems...I would say that 80+ perscent of those accused of possessing child porn plead guilty...Why do you ask? because they don't want the public or family to be in the court room when the videos are played...or a description of the image is read before the court. These people know that its wrong and they suffer the consequences. Strict restrictions imposed of people who possess child pronography do impede on the life of the accused, but they should be...they are people who pray on the young and innocent and God forbid if the released person becomes the next Bruyere who got tired of looking at child porn and walked out of his apartment in Toronto and raped and killed the next child who happened to be walking by his place. Food for thought Peter
Peter, Ottawa Ontario
03/07/09 4:49 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
"Peter"...
"Peter" -- You mis-spelled your signature. The proper spelling is "J-u-l-i-a-n F-a-n-t-i-n-o-'-s m-o-m". And BTW, 15 year-olds are not "children".
Nathanial, Slocan Valley BC
03/08/09 9:41 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Nathanial
I like your signature idea, I guess my comments are pro-fantino, and as they should be for any normal human being that believes in the welfare of our future generation. As for the 15 year old being a child....You might want to check out the Criminal Code..which was modified on May 1st 2008, raising the Age of Consent from 14 to 16. And that is also why under 18 for child pornography laws. Peter
Peter, Ottawa Ontario
03/19/09 7:15 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.