archives - 2003

Girl in CYF care working as stripper

CHILD WELFARE: Father disgusted his 15-year-old found working in a nightclub

A 15-year-old girl in the care of Child, Youth and Family has been found working as a stripper in a Nelson nightclub.

The girl's father, who was not identified, said last night that police were powerless to stop his daughter working in a strip joint.

"It disgusts me, and police are also disgusted, but their lawyers tell them there's no legal age minimum for strippers," he told the Holmes.

"It's a hole in the law that these club owners are exploiting."

Nelson MP, National's Nick Smith, said it was "disgraceful" that the law allowed 15-year-olds to work as strippers.

By closing residential facilities, the Government was failing young people, he said.

The girl's father said he had had "suspicions" for about six weeks but his fears were confirmed when his youngest daughter saw her sister on the catwalk.

"I'm probably the same as most fathers - I don't want to walk into a bar and see my daughter with no clothes on."

Police picked the girl up from the strip joint on Sunday night.

The father said he blamed the club owner but was also angry at CYF.

"They have custody of my daughter, it's a care and protection order, and they're not caring for and protecting her," he said.

"She skipped their house 10 days ago and basically they've made very little attempt to find her."

He said he had told CYF where his daughter was and had taken her home twice.

"But as soon as we're asleep she's gone, back to the same environment. "This afternoon ... I took her back to CYF so they could place her in a secure home. Just 10 minutes later they ring me back to say she's no longer there."

CYF's general manager, Vernon Smith, said the situation was complex but CYF would continue to work closely with the police and the girl's family to resolve the issues .

"CYF cannot as a matter of course lock young people away but it accepts responsibility to gain the trust of young people, to make a connection with them - and to put adults around them who can supervise and care for them."

Inspector Brian McGurk, Nelson Bays area controller, told Holmes that police were doing everything the law allowed them to do.

"We've picked up this young girl lots of times, this latest example is just a classic example of us working closely with our partner agencies looking after this girl's interests," he said.

The girl was in the temporary care of CYF and was not subject to residential conditions.

Putting her in residential care would not achieve "long-term solutions".

Police Charge Masseur

Police have used the Prostitution Reform Act for the first time to charge a Christchurch man with offering a 16-year-old for sex at a massage parlour.

William Gillanders, 59, a masseur appeared in Christchurch District Court yesterday charged with assisting a person under 18 to perform a commercial sexual service and earning from that service.

He entered no plea to the charges and was remanded on bail.

The 16-year-old, who had been working for the previous four or five weeks at a licensed massage parlour in Linwood, was not charged.

No Prison For Aucklander Who Traded Images of 3 Year Olds

How much worse can child pornography images get? According to the Judge, the images traded by Aucklander Stephen John Laing were as bad as could be imagined. Yet the Judge, despite having the power to send Laing to prison, chose not to.

Two community groups combating child pornography are extremely disappointed at yet another weak sentence that, they claim, does not reflect the gravity of the offending or act as a deterrent to others.

The criticism, from ECPAT and Stop Demand, follows the sentencing of the latest in a string of Kiwi child pornographers. Auckland student Stephen John Laing, pleaded guilty to 29 charges of trading, advertising and collecting images that included rape of children as young as three, toddlers being tortured and adults inflicting sexual acts on babies.

Yet despite the Judge noting that the images were as bad as could be imagined, he chose not to send Laing to prison, as he could have. It seems that the Judge took into account the fact that Laing was 19 at the time of the offending, that it was a first offence, his collection was small and the offending occurred over a short period of time.

But who is speaking up for those babies, toddlers and infants, the subjects of Laing's offending? There are no "second chances" for them.

Spokesperson Denise Ritchie, said "Frankly, we are frustrated at hearing judges bemoan the shocking sex acts committed on babies, youngsters and children, threaten prison for future offenders, then hand out fines and community sentences to the person standing before them. The New Zealand Courts are seriously letting down global attempts to combat the child pornography trade by dishing out such weak sentences."

"Every offender, like Laing, who perpetuates the market for this material should know that once caught they will be heading to prison. Judges already have the power to imprison those who trade such material. They do not need to wait for new laws to be introduced. For his eight charges of trading, Laing could have faced up to one year imprisonment on each charge."

Tougher child pornography laws - Where are they?

Two community groups combating child pornography say that the promised toughening up of existing weak child pornography laws cannot come soon enough. Their concerns follow today's sentencing of former Canterbury principal David Young. Young received a "paltry" fine, for offending that spanned some 12-18 months.

Spokesperson for ECPAT and Stop Demand, Denise Ritchie, said "The Government has been extremely slow to act, on promised toughening up of our current weak child pornography laws. Select Committee submissions were first heard in late 2000. What are the excuses for a three-year delay? The Government has moved smartly to amend a host of other legislation over past months. The rights of children, to be protected from online offenders, seem to be way down on the list of priorities."

"Those who seek out images of children being sexually violated, for their own sexual gratification, are in effect re-abusing those children. In addition, they perpetuate an ongoing market for further online sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children. The Government must send a strong message that such offenders, when caught, can expect to be severely punished," says Ritchie. "We have to crack down on those who create the demand for such images, if we ever hope to stop the online sexual violation of children."

The Minister of Justice announced, on 14 October, that law changes would be introduced by Christmas. However, even if the Government honours its latest promise within the next seven weeks, it is unclear when such law changes are likely to take effect.

Despite the Court's constraints under current law (namely, to impose only a fine to those convicted of "possessing" images of children being sexually violated) the fine imposed today can only be described as "paltry", says Ritchie.

Significant Legal Decisions - Board of Review: Moonen

In September 2002 the Film and Literature Board of Review met to again consider the photographs of children formerly in the possession of Gerald Moonen, who faced charges of importing prohibited goods under the Customs and Excise Act 1996. Mr. Moonen had disputed that the photographs were objectionable (and therefore prohibited) and had had his case considered by the Board of Review, the High Court and the Court of Appeal. When Mr. Moonen’s appeals were finally dismissed the District Court referred the pictures back to the Board for classification because of the amount of time that had elapsed since they were originally classified.

The photographs depicted prepubescent boys posed in a range of settings. A number of the photographs were described as reminiscent of adult ‘centerfolds ’ and as being typical of images used for sexual titillation.

The key element of the Board’s decision was to determine whether the material is able to pass through the subject matter ‘gateway’ described by the Court of Appeal in an earlier, unrelated decision.1 The Court found that only publications dealing with sex, horror, crime, cruelty or violence could be considered by censorship bodies. It also considered that the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 (Classification Act) was intended to apply to the depiction of activity rather than the expression of opinion. This raised concerns that depictions of naked children in sexual poses but not involved in sexual activity may not have been covered by the Act.

The Board determined that sexualised photographs of children and young persons pass through the gateway and stated that ‘the manner in which the models are depicted is sexualised and exploitative of boys and young persons and as such… is likely to be injurious to the public good’. The Board therefore found the images to be objectionable. In reaching its decision, the Board followed the process used in an earlier consideration of the photographs with which the Court of Appeal had found no error in law.

The criminal charges laid by the Customs Service against Mr Moonen were eventually dismissed due to errors in the original investigation. However, the decisions by the Board and Court of Appeal effectively addressed concerns over images of children in sexualised poses and provided an important benchmark for the Department in determining whether possession of, or trading in, such images should result in charges being laid.

Williamson's Child Pornography Sentence Too Light

The 20 months prison sentence handed down to Aucklander Stewart Williamson was welcomed by anti-child pornography group ECPAT. “But”, says ECPAT spokesperson Denise Ritchie, “While we appreciate that the Courts are restricted by our existing laws, it is still a light sentence by international standards.”

ECPAT says that New Zealanders like Williamson are contributing directly to the ongoing online sexual violation of children. “Online child sexual violation is a trade that would not exist, but for demand. Demand comes from New Zealanders like Williamson and some 500 Kiwis who have to date been caught trading and possessing images of children being sexually violated.” Denise Ritchie says “the cooperation between Norwegian law enforcement and New Zealand’s dedicated DIA team highlights the global commitment to combat the trade. Where New Zealand is weak, and where it is failing the international community, is in its outdated laws and weak penalties. ”

Despite murmurings of an increase in penalties earlier this year, the Government has yet to show it is moving with any urgency on promised law changes. “For our small population, New Zealanders are serious contributors to the trade in child pornography. We must crack down heavily on demand, if we ever hope to reduce the trade. One of the obvious ways in which this can be achieved is by the New Zealand Government moving smartly to change our laws. This will allow Courts to impose much heftier penalties than we are currently seeing. We have observed a flurry of activity around dog attacks, boy racers and the like. But the online sexual abuse of children? We are still waiting.”

- Media Release 31 July 2003

Impact of Law Changes Depends on Judiciary

After years of lobbying the Government for law changes, anti-child porn group ECPAT NZ, was generous in its praise for the Government's indication to "significantly" increase penalties for child pornography.

ECPAT NZ spokesperson, Denise Ritchie, said "We believe the Minister of Justice Phil Goff, in particular, has shown an increasingly strong commitment to ensure the dignity and rights of children are upheld and that children are protected from commercial sexual exploitation in all its forms."

Denise Ritchie cautions "However, the real impact of the proposed law changes will depend on how seriously the Courts view this crime". ECPAT has to date criticised a raft of "community work" sentences handed down by the Courts when prison could have been an option imposed on Kiwis convicted of trading in images, including those of young children being raped by adults. Denise Ritchie, herself a barrister, highlights the disparity with which Judges appear to view these crimes. "Some Judges have grasped the fact that child pornography is about sexual crimes against children. Other Judges appear to treat it as a purely censorship issue. One must appreciate that to create these images, children are being sexually violated and filmed, expressly to put online for the sexual gratification of other Internet users globally. Trading this material adds to a demand and market for such images, and consequently, to meet the demand, more children are violated to create further images. What is particularly insidious is that what excited a trader or possessor yesterday is unlikely to tomorrow. This creates a demand for more extreme images. If we are serious about combating child pornography, we must crack down heavily on 'demand'."

ECPAT believes that the maximum penalties proposed, two years for possession and ten years for producing and trading, more adequately reflect the gravity of the offending and will hopefully act as a deterrent to some.

- Media release 05 March 2003