BRADFORD CHILD PORNOGRAPHY LAWYER
Ontario Provincial Police statistics state that a single month’s worth of child exploitation investigations led to 551 child exploitation charges in November 2018. There were 834 unique IP addresses identified that accessed child pornography during November alone. Since inception of the child pornography investigations in 2006, police said the provincial strategy has resulted in nearly 21,000 charges against 5,686 people. The growth of the internet has led to an increase in the volume and extent of child pornography. The number of police-reported child pornography incidents increased from 6,360 incidents in 2016 to 6,521 incidents in 2017 in Canada. Bradford, Ontario is no exception to this trend in increasing incidents of reported child pornography incidents. In 2014, a Bradford teen was charged in an international child pornography investigation. Amongst other charges, he was charged with possession of child pornography. In 2015, a Bradford man faced 61 charges, including possession of child pornography.
The Bradford courthouse is located at 57 Holland Street East in Bradford, Ontario. The Bradford courthouse is formally called the West Gwillimbury Courthouse. The Ontario Court of Justice for in Bradford can be reached at 905-775-2621. If you are looking for information about your upcoming court appearance in Bradford, click here.
The Firm has defended a number of High Profile Child Pornography allegations where Microsoft, Google and Twitter have sent cyber tips to the National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre (NCECC) located in the United States, which have ultimately been used as a basis for Production Orders from Rogers Communication and Bell by Toronto, Halton and Peel Police. In the Firm’s R. v. J.A. , Ontario Police ICE Unit received a Cyber Tip from the National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre (NCECC) and the FBI, who received a complaint from the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), located in the United States. Ultimately the Firm secured a withdrawal of both Possession and Distribution of Child Pornography in Guelph. The Firm also defends a number of offenders caught on the Darknet, including where offenders attempt to use anonymous file sharing software, private networks or Tor Browser to avoid detection, such as its R. v. J.T. .
For more information on child pornography offences, click here. Our firm also conducts in-house child pornography forensics in Toronto to assist with your relevant defences. For information on our forensics practice, click here.
Frequently Asked Questions
How is Child Pornography Defined?
What are the Different Types of Child Pornography Charges?
What is the Difference between Making and Making Available Child Pornography?
What is the Difference between Possessing and Accessing Child Pornography?
What is a Prohibition Order?
What is a Forfeiture of Property?
What if Child Pornography is Downloaded by Accident?
What is Child Pornography?
Section 163.1(1) of the Criminal Code defines what child pornography means for individuals charged with child pornography in Bradford. In this section, there are four separate meanings of “child pornography”. These include:
1) A film, video, photograph, or other visual representation that shows a person who either is or is depicted as being younger that eighteen years of age and is either engaged in or depicted as engaging in sexual activity OR the dominant characteristic of the depiction is of the anal region or a sexual organ of someone younger than eighteen years of age for a sexual purpose.
2) A visual representation, written material, or audio recording which advocates for or counsels someone else to have sexual activity with a person younger than eighteen years of age.
3) Written material that has a dominant characteristic, for a sexual purpose, of describing sexual activity with a person younger than eighteen years of age.
4) An audio recording which has a dominant characteristic, for a sexual purpose, of describing, representing, or presenting sexual activity with a person younger than eighteen years of age.
What are the Different Types of Child Pornography Offences?
The Criminal Code sets out four separate child pornography offences, including making child pornography, making available (distributing) child pornography, possessing child pornography, and accessing child pornography. Each type of offence has separate requirements to be found guilty of the offence and each offence has different maximum and minimum imprisonment terms.
What is the Difference Between Making and Making Available Child Pornography?
When an individual is charged with making child pornography, the Bradford Crown is required to prove that the individual made an instance of child pornography that differs from other instances that already exist. The person who is considered the “maker” of the child pornography is the person who controls or directs the production of the child pornography. Making available child pornography is different from this. An individual who makes available child pornography is someone who makes a child pornography file accessible, whether that be through public access or discrete file sharing. This offence solely considers whether the individual distributed child pornographic files. The Bradford Crown should be able to prove that the individual actually intended to make the child pornography files available.
What is the Difference Between Possessing and Accessing Child Pornography?
The main difference between the offences of possessing and accessing child pornography involves deducing whether there was possession of the child pornography files in some way. The offence of possession of child pornography requires that the accused possessed images, texts, or videos that were child pornographic in nature. If an individual solely accesses a child pornography file, this is the offence of accessing. This is different from possession as there is no storing of the child pornography file.
What is a Prohibition Order?
An individual who is convicted of a child pornography offence that involves a person who is under sixteen years of age faces the possibility of the court ordering the prohibition of the offender from engaging in any activity that could bring them into contact with someone who is under sixteen years of age. A prohibition order is discretionary, and thus not all individuals charged with a child pornography offence will face one. As well, the length of the prohibition order can vary from case to case, with some individual’s facing a prohibition order for life. The following is a list if prohibitions that the offender may face:
– The offender may be prohibited from seeking, obtaining, or continuing any employment or volunteer work that puts them in a position of authority or trust over an individual younger than sixteen years of age.
– The offender may be prohibited from going to public swimming areas, such as a beach or a community pool, or going to a public park where individuals who are younger than sixteen years of age are present, or one could reasonably assume would be present.
– The offender may be prohibited from being near a school ground, day care centre, community centre, or playground.
– The offender may be prohibited from using the Internet or any other digital networks unless the offender uses them under conditions set by the court.
– The offender may be prohibited from having any contact with a person who is under sixteen years of age. They may be able to do so under the supervision of an individual who the court has deemed appropriate.
What is Forfeiture of Property?
An individual who is convicted of a child pornography offence may be ordered to forfeit some of their property. This may include forfeiture of computers, computer tablets, or mobile devices.
What if I Accidentally Download Child Pornography?
It is not necessary that the Bradford Crown establish that an individual intentionally downloaded child pornography to establish that they possessed it. Therefore, an individual who accidentally downloads child pornography may still be charged with the offence. In order for an accused to rely on the fact that they accidentally downloaded child pornography, they must offer evidence that supports this conclusion. Otherwise, it may be assumed that the accused intended to download child pornography materials.