Successful Advocacy Campaign by Derek Floyd, M.A.

CA K.I.D.S. (Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe) COALITION Protecting Innocence in the Digital Age

FINAL P RODUCT

January 2012

Advocates for Encouraging & Protecting Computer Technicians in California to Report Child Abuse

UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO LEAD 513 / ADVOCACY SKILLS & STRATEGIES DANA BLACK | DEREK FLOYD | KAREN GOULD | CHRISTINE HOUSTON | MEREDITH PRANIEWICZ Web: www.cakidscoalition.com Twitter: @CAKIDSCoalition

Email: info@cakidscoalition.com Facebook: CA K.I.D.S. Coalition

"We are a society of technological advance. Sadly, some leverage those advances to hurt children. Blaming this problem on peer-‐to-‐peer innovation is like blaming the Interstate highway system when someone uses it to transport drugs. What we have to do is scale our law enforcement, prosecutorial and judicial resources to ensure we, as a society, are prepared to respond to the challenges that come from innovation, that we are prepared to rescue children when the map to their abuse is sitting right in front of us."1

Special Agent Flint Waters, WY Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force Commander 2008 Testimony before Congress

1 United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary. (2008, April 4). Testimony of Special Agent Flint Waters, Lead Agent for the

Wyoming Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation, Office of the Attorney General. Challenges and Solutions for Protecting our Children from Violence and Exploitation in the 21st Century. Retrieved from www.judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/08-‐04-‐16WatersTestimony.pdf. p. 3.

1 | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION – THE 10 STEPS IN ACTION ......................................................................................... 3 STEP 1: IDENTIFY THE ISSUE ..................................................................................................................... 3 STEP 2: RESEARCH THE ISSUE ................................................................................................................... 4 STEP 3: CREATE A FACT SHEET ................................................................................................................. 6 STEP 4: BRAND THE ISSUE .......................................................................................................................... 7 STEP 5: MAP OUT POSSIBLE SUPPORTERS & DETRACTORS ........................................................... 8 STEP 6: FORM A COALITION ....................................................................................................................... 9 STEP 7: DEVELOP EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS ................................................................................... 10 STEP 8: LAUNCH A MEDIA CAMPAIGN ................................................................................................... 10 STEP 9: APPROACH ELECTED OFFICIALS ............................................................................................. 11 STEP 10: MONITOR PROGRESS ON THE ISSUE ................................................................................... 14 ATTACHMENTS A – White Paper B – Fact Sheet C – Positional Map D – Issue Statement, FAX Template & MOU E – Other State’s Laws F – Website G – Facebook H – Twitter I – Online Petition J – Sacramento Legislative Schedule

2 | P a g e

INTRODUCTION – THE 10 STEPS IN ACTION At the beginning of the semester, armed with The Lobbying Strategy Handbook: 10 Steps to Advancing any Cause Effectively by Pat Libby & Associates, our class set about pitching various issues of concern in our community that we believe warranted legislative fixes. The handbook describes a 10-‐point framework to guide an advocacy campaign. The steps are: identify an issue; research the issue; create a fact sheet; “brand” the issue; map out possible supporters and detractors; form a coalition; develop educational materials; launch a media campaign; approach elected officials; and monitor progress on the issue. As various students in the class offered potential campaign ideas, step one was underway. STEP 1: IDENTIFY THE ISSUE Class member Derek Floyd, who works for The Innocent Justice Foundation, a local nonprofit that helps rescue children from sexual abuse by supporting law enforcement agencies that investigate Internet crimes against children, raised the issue of mandatory reporting laws for child abuse and neglect to include librarians. In 2008, a librarian in northern California contacted local law enforcement authorities when she saw a man repeatedly using the library’s public computer to view and/or download child sexual abuse images (e.g., child pornography); the librarian was fired for reporting the incident. The issue resonated with four other classmates: Dana Black, Karen Gould, Christine Houston, and Meredith Praniewicz. The project team was officially formed on October 6, 2011, at which time we began our research and were off and running; or so we thought.

3 | P a g e

STEP 2: RESEARCH THE ISSUE Next, we began to research the issue more in depth, learning all we could about child pornography, California’s Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act (CANRA), the past incident with the librarian, and the National District Attorneys Association (NDAA) – Comprehensive Child Neglect Statutory Compilation & Chart. The NDAA’s report outlines various types of child abuse and neglect in each state. One thing we learned as we looked into the issue of librarians is that we would most likely meet strong opposition form the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Association of Libraries. Given our limited experience and resources, our team questioned whether or not we wanted to face strong opposition from the ACLU and others right out of the gate, so we continued to research further. In addition to librarians, another profession comes across child sexual abuse images regularly through their course of work: computer technicians. As the team looked more closely at the thirty-‐eight professions mandated to report child abuse under California Penal Code Section 11165.7, we were surprised to find that the 29th profession is “commercial film and photographic print processors.” Prior to the Internet and advances in digital technology, child predators used to photograph their exploitation of children on 35 mm film, have it developed at a commercial print processor (i.e., local Kodak store) and trade the images through the mail. However, through our continued research we found that today the vast majority of child pornography images are digital and are traded electronically. With this knowledge, we shifted our issue to updating the mandatory reporting law to include commercial computer technicians, simply bringing the law into the digital age. We finally settled on our issue and held our first official meeting on October 20, 2011.

4 | P a g e

Knowing that having researched every possible angle of this issue would put us in the best position to eventually securing a bill author later in the process (Step 9), we all had to become the experts on this topic. Our team’s research included: §

Reading numerous national government studies and initiatives on combating the child pornography problem in the United States.

§

Understanding federal child pornography laws and California’s CANRA

§

Researching the cost to society of child sexual abuse.

§

Phone, email, and in person communications with various Internet Crimes Against. Children (ICAC) Task Force Commanders, National District Attorneys Association (NDAA), and the San Diego District Attorneys Office.

§

Researching two past attempts to pass similar legislation (e.g., AB2304 – Runner, 2005-‐ 2006; AB1475 – Galgiani, 2007-‐2008), as well as direct contact with the offices of both Runner and Galgiani.

§

Researching ten other states that have passed similar legislation, including their laws, supporters and detractors, and the reactions of the technology industries. This included conversations with the Oregon Telecommunications Association (OTA).

§

Researching the technology industry’s existing policies on reporting child pornography, and gauging their potential support or opposition of this legislation, including communications with various industry associations and large companies with broad name recognition (i.e., Best Buy, Microsoft, etc.).

§

Understanding developments in California law that might impact opposition to the proposed legislation, specifically AB109, which transfers non-‐violent, non-‐serious, non-‐ sexual offenders from state prisons to local prisons.

5 | P a g e

§

Researching the committees where the past proposals failed (e.g., Senate Public Safety and Senate Appropriations), including studying bill analysis from those committees.

§

Utilized a team member’s personal connection to a current Sacramento-‐based lobbyist with intimate knowledge of the legislators and their staff and the personal relationships and connections between the legislators, which helped us better understand the politics involved.

§

We also conducted an information-‐gathering trip to Sacramento on December 13, 2011, to interview chief consultants for both Senate Public Safety and Senate Appropriations committees, offices of Members and Chairs of those committees, the office of Assemblymember Galgiani to better understand from the source why AB1475 failed and what we could possibly do to ensure its success this time, as well as offices of Senator Juan Vargas and Assemblymember Mike Feuer, both of whom will be proposing adding university coaches as mandated reporters.

This entire information gathering process was crucial for us to better understand our issue, as well as to create a fully informed white paper2 and fact sheet, and ultimately be as well prepared as possible for our January 9, 2012, trip to Sacramento to lobby the issue. STEP 3: CREATE A FACT SHEET3 While our research on the issue never ended, by the beginning of November 2011, we believed we had enough information to create our fact sheet. The fact sheet is a one page double-‐sided document that highlights the key facts, statistics with references, and talking points of our issue in an easy-‐to-‐read, visually engaging format that we would present to 2 Attachment A 3 Attachment B

6 | P a g e

legislators and community organizations we intended to recruit as coalition members (Step 6). Our fact sheet when through several iterations as we updated it to align with our evolving messaging. STEP 4: BRAND THE ISSUE During our research of other child abuse prevention organizations, we found that many of the images they used focused on the negative aspects or emotions of the abused children, perhaps intending a visceral response to the topic. Several research studies show a high correlation between those who possess and trade child pornography and those who actually physically commit hands-‐on sexual abuse of children. In framing our issue, we chose to focus on imagery of healthy, happy, empowered children; we wanted to portray images of how we believed children would and should be if living a life free of sexual abuse as a result of passing our legislation. We believed we would more effectively motivate people to take action by encouraging them to protect the joy and innocence of childhood. A second key component of our branding was communicating how outdated the current law mandating “commercial film and photographic print processors,” is. The law does not account for the digital, technology-‐driven world in which we currently live. To communicate this perspective, we used the question: “When was the last time you developed a roll of film?” Another crucial element of our branding actually came from Professor Libby during one of our final classes. Our fact sheet described “mandating commercial computer technicians to report child abuse,” however Professor Libby recommended that we re-‐frame the issue not as one of “mandating,” rather of one of “encouraging and protecting” the technicians. This was invaluable information, which would help us later in selling the idea, not only to the legislators,

7 | P a g e

but also to the technology industry. Our final iteration took this one step further by pointing out the benefits to computer technicians of being mandating reporters. STEP 5: MAP OUT POSSIBLE SUPPORTERS & DETRACTORS4 As similar legislation had been proposed twice before, we had a point of reference from which to begin mapping out possible supporters and detractors. In AB2304, proposed in 2005-‐ 2006 by Assemblymember Sharon Runner, the bill only had opposition from the Free Speech Coalition (FSC), which represents the adult pornography industry. In federal child pornography law, as well as in AB2304, a “minor” is defined as someone under the age of eighteen years old. The FSC opposed AB2304 because they believed computer technicians wouldn’t be able to accurately distinguish between legal adult pornography, which may portray women 18 years or older as younger, and actual child pornography. In 2007-‐2008, Assemblymember Cathleen Galgiani attempted again to pass this legislation with AB1475. In her language, however, she defined the age of a minor as someone under the age of sixteen years old, which appeased the FSC; there was no formal opposition to AB1475. Having the bill history also helped us see the long list of supporters, which we would reach out to support our proposal as we began building our coalition. In general, supporters included: law enforcement, district attorney’s offices, and child advocacy organizations. We did encounter slight hesitation from child protective services workers, who believed the law would increase their workload because computer technicians would now be required to contact them. However, we overcame this objection by explaining that under current law, mandated reporters are required to contact law enforcement, and have the option of contacting child protective services who then must report to law enforcement. As 4 Attachment C

8 | P a g e

commercial print developers and computer technicians do not have direct contact with children, only the image of a child being sexually abused, our proposal would require technicians to report directly to law enforcement, not child protective services. Our initial contacts with the technology industry showed that many companies already have internal policies in place when a technician discovers child pornography during their normal course of business, and would be supportive; they simply would like to see bill language before officially signing on as supporters. We also encountered some industry associations that were nervous about this proposed requirement. We have been working with them to address their concerns and hopefully bring them on as supporters. STEP 6: FORM A COALITION Working from our positional map of supporters and detractors, as well as past supporters of AB2304 and AB1475, we began building a list of potential coalition members to approach. Some team members sought local supporters (i.e., Promises2Kids, Voices for Children, San Diego District Attorney, Community Alliance for Escondido – CAFE, San Diego Police Chiefs & Sheriff’s Association, etc.). We also wanted to make sure we had broad-‐based support from important statewide and national organizations, such as the California Sheriff’s Association, The National Association to Protect Children/PROTECT, etc. Finally, we targeted coalition members in districts of members of Senate and Assembly Public Safety committees across California. If we could show support, that is voters, in their districts care about this issue, it would be harder for them to ignore. Attached is our issue statement that we used as a framework when contacting potential supporters, as well as a fax template and memorandum of understanding (MOU) we

9 | P a g e

used to certify the agreement between the K.I.D.S. Coalition and the supporting organization.5 Going into our January meeting with legislators, we had fourteen confirmed or pending coalition supporters, and our work in this area has only begun. STEP 7: DEVELOP EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS In addition to our white paper and fact sheet, we also created a document summarizing our research on the laws of the ten other states that have enacted similar legislation.6 This was extremely valuable to various legislative offices and committee counsels with whom we spoke. We also decided to use technology to our advantage. We created a robust website7 (www.cakidscoalition.com), as well as created a Facebook page8, Twitter account9, and recently a LinkedIn group. The website has been a valuable tool, in fact the chief counsel to Senate Appropriations mentioned that she had used the site to review the national research studies we have posted there. We also have included a coalition page, with links to all of our supporters, as well as a way for residents to look up their local legislators to contact them on the issue. In addition, we have created an online petition10, but will wait until we have an actual bill number and author before we begin distributing to our coalition and in our social media. STEP 8: LAUNCH A MEDIA CAMPAIGN To date, we have only begun implementing social media aspects of our media campaign, specifically with the intention of building coalition support. We began developing a media list of local California newspapers and television stations, targeting reporters who cover or have 5 Attachment D 6 Attachment E 7 Attachment F

8 Attachment G 9 Attachment H

10 Attachment I

10 | P a g e

covered issues similar to ours in the past. We are developing a press release format and template, but have not yet contacted any media outlets. We want to make sure we have had more conversations with the technology industry before we go to the media; we do not want this legislation to be a surprise to them and potentially cause a negative reaction. STEP 9: APPROACH ELECTED OFFICIALS We began approaching elected officials by mid December 2011. As previously mentioned, as part of our initial research efforts, members of the team went to Sacramento in December to conduct information visits and establish relationships with key advisors. Meetings included: 1. Alison Anderson, chief consultant for Senate Public Safety Committee. This meeting was one of the primary reasons for our trip. She was present when AB1475 went to committee and referred to Appropriations to attach the cost of one technician failing to report and serving six months in prison. She said she did not foresee attaching a cost this time around. She also alluded to the fact that the committee members are different at this time than in 2007-‐2008. 2. Tim Shelley, chief of staff for Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair of Senate Appropriations. We felt it was important to establish this relationship early on, letting him know that we are constituents in their district proposing this legislation, which could eventually come across the senator’s committee. 3. Rebecca Marcus, legislative staff for Assemblymember Mike Feuer. During our coalition building, we contacted Robert Fellmeth, executive director of the Children’s Advocacy Institute at the University of San Diego, who informed us that he was working with Assemblymember Feuer to add university coaches, and also

11 | P a g e

computer technicians to the list of mandated reporters. We felt it was important to meet with Feuer’s office to let them know our plans to add computer technicians so that we were not duplicating efforts. During the interview we learned that several other legislators were proposing university coaches, or some variation, and also that Feuer was not including computer technicians. 4. Jazmin Hicks, legislative assistant for Senator Juan Vargas. We read in local San Diego news that Senator Vargas would be proposing adding university coaches, and we wanted to touch base and let them know of our plans with computer technicians. Jazmin was really excited to be talking with us, and said that Senator Vargas’ bill language was basically finalized, but that we should definitely remain in contact. 5. Jolie Onodera, consultant for Senate Appropriations Committee. Our intention was to gather information about the cost attached to AB1475 and let her know we would be attempting similar legislation again. She seemed encouraged that Alison Anderson didn’t foresee adding the cost of a technician failing to report. Jolie explained that her job would be to calculate the cost of potential cost increase of offenders being apprehended, but also said that just because a cost is attached doesn’t mean the bill is dead. 6. Victoria Grajek, chief of staff for Assemblymember Cathleen Galgiani. We thought this meeting would be important to hear directly from the staff more about the history of AB1475, from their perspective, and also to let them know we were attempting this again.

12 | P a g e

In addition, in late December and early January, members of our team met with local offices of Senator Juan Vargas as well as Assemblymember Toni Atkins. Both meetings were very encouraging, particularly with Atkins’ staff. By this point we had already scheduled our legislative visits for our upcoming trip on January 9, 2012, and would be meeting with Atkins’ office then. Having thoroughly researched this issue, our team felt confident we had developed a comprehensive strategy for January 9th that targeted Democrats on both Assembly and Senate Public Safety and Appropriations committees. We also scheduled a meeting with Assemblymember Nora Campos, Chair of the Committee on Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media, as we learned she was looking for a bill to author and that our proposal might be a good fit. Attached is our complete Legislative Schedule for our trip to Sacramento, complete with notes explaining the purpose of our meetings, who we identified as possible authors, notes on our strategy, and any other information that would help us during the meetings.11 In total, we lobbied sixteen legislators that day, and the response was extremely positive. We had strong interest in authorship from several legislators, including: Senator Ron Calderon; Senator Curren Price; and Assemblymember Nancy Skinner. Several others seemed very interested, including: Assemblymember Toni Atkins; Assemblymember Holly Mitchell; Senator Elaine Alquist; and Assemblymember Gil Cedillo. During our final meeting of the day, with Assemblymember Nora Campos, the team met with her directly and she agreed to author the bill!

11 Attachment J

13 | P a g e

STEP 10: MONITOR PROGRESS ON THE ISSUE We returned to San Diego with an author for our proposal, however, we knew that we also had strong interest from three legislators who might be better positioned politically to champion the bill. Assemblymember Campos’ counsel had already drafted bill language that was completely different from what we were proposing, so we now will engage in a negotiation phase, and also continue to pursue our top three choices for authors: Senator Calderon; Senator Price; and Assemblymember Skinner. Our work to secure the best possible author continues in these next few weeks following our trip to Sacramento, and we anticipate months of follow-‐up as we secure coalition supporters, work on legislative language, and generate media coverage.

14 | P a g e

Attachment A

CA K.I.D.S. (Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe) COALITION Protecting Innocence in the Digital Age

WHITE P APER

January 2012

Advocates for Encouraging & Protecting Computer Technicians in California to Report Child Abuse

Contact Us: Dana Black, 858-‐775-‐8450 | Meredith Praniewicz, 619-‐971-‐1554 Karen Gould, 408-‐966-‐5388 | Derek Floyd, 619-‐952-‐8395 | Christine Houston, 619-‐721-‐7163 Web: www.cakidscoalition.com Twitter: @CAKIDSCoalition

Email: info@cakidscoalition.com Facebook: CA K.I.D.S. Coalition

Special Agent Flint Waters, WY Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force Commander 2008 Testimony before Congress

1 United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary. (2008, April 4). Testimony of Special Agent Flint Waters, Lead Agent for the

1 | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 3 WHAT IS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY? ............................................................................................................. 4 CORRELATION BETWEEN THOSE WHO VIEW CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND ABUSE CHILDREN ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 COSTS TO SOCIETY OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE ...................................................................................... 6 CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND THE DIGITAL AGE ................................................................................... 7 THE CURRENT APPROACH .......................................................................................................................... 8 BENEFITS OF DESIGNATING COMPUTER TECHNICIANS AS MANDATED REPORTERS ............ 9 PAST LEGISLATION ........................................................................................................................................ 9 THE SOLUTION .............................................................................................................................................. 11 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................................... 13 References ...................................................................................................................................................... 14

2 | P a g e

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recent tragic, high profile cases have launched the issue of child sexual abuse into national attention. People across the state and around the country are demanding that we review our laws governing how we protect our children. California law currently mandates thirty-‐eight professions to report suspected child abuse and neglect, including: teachers, doctors, counselors, and social workers.2 One profession on the list, commercial film developers, were once on the front lines of finding child sexual abuse images (e.g., child pornography) because up until recently, child predators would photograph their exploits and have their film developed commercially. However, today the vast majority of child pornography is in digital video and image format and traded online.3 The technological advances of the Internet have dramatically increased the scale and nature of the child pornography problem.4 In 2007, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), a nonprofit mandated by Congress to catalogue child sexual abuse images, reported that it had identified 9.6 million images and videos of child pornography and believed there were millions more yet to be identified.5 In order to keep up with the digital age, California needs to update its mandated reporters law to include computer technicians. Through their daily course of work, technicians are the people most likely to find child sexual abuse images.6 By including them in the list of mandated reporters, technicians would be required to report to law enforcement if they were to find child pornography and they would be protected from criminal and civil

2 Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act, California Penal Code Section 11164-‐11174.3. Retrieved from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-‐bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=11001-‐12000&file=11164-‐11174.3 3 Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell K. J. (2005). Child-‐pornography possessors arrested in Internet-‐related crimes: Findings from the national juvenile online victimization study. 4 U.S. Department of Justice. (2006, May). Child pornography on the Internet. (Office of Community Oriented Policing Services; Problem-‐Oriented Guides for Police Problem-‐Specific Guides Series No. 41). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 5 National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. (2007, November 26). NCMEC commentary. Retrieved from http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=3463 6 Personal communication with Jeffrey Dort, San Diego District Attorney’s Office on December 20, 2011.

3 | P a g e

liability. Several studies show a strong correlation between those who view child pornography and those who abuse children.7 By identifying those who view these images we will be taking an important step to protecting our children.

WHAT IS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY? Some people are concerned that child pornography might be confused with images of naked children in the bathtub or playing on the beach. In reality, however, federal law (18 U.S.C. §2256) clearly defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct (e.g., actual or simulated sexual intercourse) that involves a minor.8 These images consist of actual crime scene photos or videos of children being sexually exploited, abused and tortured. In fact, a study published in 2005 of child pornography collections seized by law enforcement showed that: -

83% had images of children between the ages of 6 and 12

39% had images of children between the ages of 3 and 6

19% had images of children under the age of 3

80% had images depicting sexual penetration

21% had images depicting children in bondage and being tortured.9

NOTE: The following example of child pornography is extremely graphic and disturbing. In his 2008 testimony to Congress, ICAC special agent Flint Waters described the following example of a frequently viewed child pornography video that was circulating at the time:

7 Bourke, M. L., & Hernandez, A. E. (2008). The ‘butner study’ redux: A report of the incidence of hands on child victimization by child pornography offenders. The Journal of Family Violence, 24, 183-‐191. doi: 10.1007/s10896-‐008-‐9219-‐y. 8 National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. (n.d.). What is child pornography? Retrieved from http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?PageId=1504 9 Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell K. J. (2005). Child-‐pornography possessors arrested in Internet-‐related crimes: Findings from the national juvenile online victimization study.

4 | P a g e

“One of the most frequently seen movies being distributed now is of a toddler on a changing table. The video zooms in as the child’s diaper is removed and an unknown male penetrates her. We are seeing the rape of more and more extremely young children like this.”10 (p. 2) Clearly, the child pornography problem in America is far worse than ever imagined.

CORRELATION BETWEEN THOSE WHO VIEW CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND ABUSE CHILDREN Studies show a strong correlation between the possession of child sexual abuse and torture images and the infliction of hands-‐on child sexual abuse.11 The 2008 Butner Study Redux, conducted in Butner Federal Prison, North Carolina, involved 155 child pornography offenders who volunteered to undergo treatment.12 Upon their arrest, 40 of the child pornography offenders (26%) had also been identified as having sexually abused a total of 75 children – an average of 1.88 children per offender. However, during treatment: -

85% admitted to having molested children

13% denied molesting children and then failed a polygraph, and

2% passed the polygraph but admitted that if given an opportunity, they would offend.

After treatment, it was found that the 132 admitted hands-‐on child abuse offenders had a total of 1,777 child sexual abuse victims, an average of 13.56 victims per offender.

10 United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary. (2008, April 4). Testimony of Special Agent Flint Waters, Lead Agent for the Wyoming Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation, Office of the Attorney General. Challenges and Solutions for Protecting our Children from Violence and Exploitation in the 21st Century. Retrieved from www.judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/08-‐04-‐16WatersTestimony.pdf. 11 Bourke, M. L., & Hernandez, A. E. (2008); Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell K. J. (2005). 12 Bourke, M. L., & Hernandez, A. E. (2008).

5 | P a g e

Other studies show a lower correlation between those who view child pornography and those who sexually abuse children, however, even the most conservative of those studies still shows a significant correlation. A Department of Justice study found that of 1,713 people arrested for Internet-‐related sex crimes against minors, 55 percent were dual offenders who possessed child pornography and also sexually abused children or were attempting to solicit sex from undercover agents posing as children online.13 Of those who were initially identified as child pornography possessors only, 1 in 6 were later discovered to have also sexually abused children.

COSTS TO SOCIETY OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE The cost of child sexual abuse to society is staggering. Darkness to Light, a national child abuse prevention organization, estimates that the annual cost to California alone is over $400 million in law enforcement, judicial proceedings, victim counseling, lost productivity, etc.14 In addition, child sexual abuse over the long term significantly contributes to other societal problems, such as: -

More than 60% of pregnant teens have been previous victims of sexual abuse.

More than 70% of male survivors of sexual abuse seek treatment for substance abuse and attempted suicide.

Young girls who are sexually abused are three times more likely to suffer from psychological and substance abuse issues than girls who have not suffered abuse.15

13 Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell K. J. (2005). 14 Darkness to Light. (n.d.) The economic impact of child sexual abuse. Retrieved from http://www.d2l.org/site/c.4dICIJOkGcISE/b.6069261/k.E915/The_Economic_Impact_of_Child_Sexual_Abuse.htm 15 Darkness to Light. (n.d.). What are the long term consequences of child sexual abuse. Retrieved from http://www.d2l.org/site/c.4dICIJOkGcISE/b.6250811/k.B97D/What_are_the_Long_Term_Consequences_of_Child_Sexual_Abuse. htm

6 | P a g e

CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND THE DIGITAL AGE Recent advances in the Internet and digital technology have dramatically increased the ability and ease with which perpetrators can photograph, videotape, store and trade their sexual abuse of children.16 The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children has reported staggering statistics about child pornography: -

In 2007, had identified 9.6 million images and videos of child pornography and believed there were millions more yet to be identified.

In 2005, declared child pornography as a multi-‐billion dollar industry, and at that time, one of the fastest growing Internet industries.

In 2003, estimated that since 1997 the number of child pornography images available on the Internet had increased by 1500%. 17

In 2010, the Department of Justice estimated that the child pornography industry generates over $3 billion dollars annually, and more than 200 new images of children being sexually abused are circulated each day to drive market demand.18 Over 600,000 unique Internet Protocol (IP) addresses (i.e., individual computers) have been tracked trading these images in the United States alone.19 Not surprisingly, with such easy access to digital material, traditional print media has rapidly declined as a source of child pornography. One study found that only 18 percent of those arrested for possession of child pornography had print images while 96 percent had digital

16 U.S. Department of Justice. (2006, May). Child pornography on the Internet. (Office of Community Oriented P olicing Services; Problem-‐Oriented Guides for Police Problem-‐Specific Guides Series No. 41). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 17 National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. (2007, November 26). NCMEC commentary. Retrieved from http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=3463 18 U.S. Department of Justice. (2010). The national strategy for child exploitation prevention and interdiction: A report to Congress. p. 15 or see also: United Nations. (2000). Report of the special rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostituti4son and child pornography. Najat M’jid Maalla. A/HRC/12/23. 13 July 2009. 19 Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Data Network.

7 | P a g e

images.20 In addition, it is estimated that 91 percent of arrested Child Pornography possessors used a personal home computer and 77 percent used the same device to access exploitative images.21 Clearly, in order to combat the pervasiveness of child pornography and the continued exploitation of children, California law needs to be updated to reflect these technological changes.

THE CURRENT APPROACH California currently lists 38 professions as mandated reporters of child abuse and neglect. The law specifically defines that mandated reporters must report if they have “reasonable suspicion” of child abuse or neglect. As defined by the law, “reasonable suspicion means that it is objectively reasonable for a person to entertain a suspicion, based upon facts that could cause a reasonable person in a like position, drawing, when appropriate, on his or her training and experience, to suspect child abuse or neglect.” Reasonable suspicion does not require certainty on the part of mandated reporters. In return for their requirement to report reasonable suspicion, the law provides mandated reporters with protection from criminal and civil liability if the reports are made in good faith. The law clearly defines who mandated reporters must notify: the police or sheriff’s department, county probation department or county welfare department. Ten states within the United States have already updated their mandated reporters of child abuse and neglect laws to include computer technicians. Those states are: Alaska, Illinois, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina and South

20 Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell K. J. (2005). 21 Ibid.

8 | P a g e

Dakota. If California were to take this important step, it would be the 11th state in the nation to modernize its laws to better protect children.

BENEFITS OF DESIGNATING COMPUTER TECHNICIANS AS MANDATED REPORTERS

Many companies (i.e., Best Buy) that employ computer repair technicians currently have

internal policies in place regarding notifying law enforcement if technicians find child pornography during the course of their daily work. In fact, according to the San Diego District Attorney’s office, technicians are currently the second most important source of identifying child pornography possessors for their office.22 By including computer technicians as mandated reporters, computer technicians would be provided the criminal and civil liability protection for good faith reporting that are afforded all mandated.23

In addition, by designating computer technicians as mandated reporters, it removes the

moral dilemma that technicians may feel if they find child pornography while working. Some technicians debate important questions, such as: whether or not they should report; is it an invasion of privacy if they do report; and what will happen if they do report. As mandated reporters, the technicians would have legal certainty; they would know that they need to report, to whom they need to report, their job would be secure if they do report, and what will happen when they do report.

PAST LEGISLATION Including computer technicians as mandated reporters has been proposed twice before: during the 2005-‐2006 session by Assemblymember Sharon Runner (AB 2304) and again in the 2007-‐2008 legislative term by Assemblymember Cathleen Galgiani (AB1475). 22 Personal communication with Jeffrey Dort, San Diego District Attorney’s Office on December 20, 2011. 23 CA Penal Code 11172. Retrieved from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-‐bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=11001-‐ 12000&file=11164-‐11174.3

9 | P a g e

Two issues were raised regarding AB 2304. First, the language of the bill did not specify protection for computer technicians. Computer technicians were left open to prosecution for accessing child pornography images for the purposes of filing a child abuse report. The bill was amended to provide an immunity clause for such mandated reporters. The second issue , regarding the definition of a minor, was cited by the only group opposed to the bill, an adult entertainment film corporation called The Free Speech Coalition (FSC). In federal child pornography law, as well as in AB2304, a “minor” is defined as someone under the age of eighteen years old. The FSC opposed AB2304 because they believed computer technicians would not be able to accurately distinguish between legal adult pornography, which sometimes portrays women 18 years or older as younger girls, and actual child pornography. The FSC asked that the definition of a minor be changed to ". . . appears to be under 16 years of age unless the reporter has information that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the depicted person is an adult.” No provisions for the FSC were made to amend the bill or at the time of the vote. In AB1475, Galgiani defined the age of a minor as someone under the age of sixteen years old, which appeased the FSC. AB1475 was almost identical in nature to AB2304, however, Galgiani’s bill outline the following provisions: 1) Adding commercial computer technician to the list of mandated reporters; 2) Defining commercial computer technician to "mean any person who works for a licensed business that repairs, installs, or otherwise services any computer including, but not limited to, any component part, device, memory storage or recording mechanism, auxiliary storage recording or memory capacity, or any

10 | P a g e

other materials relating to the operation and maintenance of a computer or computer network or system for a fee;” and 3) Allowing a provision to apply to materials depicting a child "who appears to be under 16 years of age being subject to, or involved in, sexual abuse." The bill also defined mandatory time requirements of CANRA to 36 hours and created a provision for computer technicians to report by filing a report with the CyberTipline through the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (pursuant to Section13032 of Title 42 of the United States Code). AB1475 was unopposed and passed through assembly and senate public safety. However, the senate public safety committee referred the bill to senate appropriations, which attached a cost of $23,000, which represented the cost of putting one computer technician in jail for not reporting. The bill died in appropriations. During the same legislative term, Assemblymember Jim Beall successfully enacted AB2337, which updated penal code §11165.7 by adding alcohol and drug counselors to the list of mandated reporters.

THE SOLUTION Create legislation to update California’s penal code 11165.7 to bring it into the digital age. A. Update California’s current list of 38 mandated reporters

There are two approaches that could be taken to update the current list of mandated

reporters of child abuse and neglect, both of which are supported by the K.I.D.S. Coalition. One approach would be to update the 29th reporter (commercial film and photographic print processors) to also include computer technicians. Given that the intent of this amendment

11 | P a g e

would be to simply ensure the law is keeping up with technological advances, these professions could be grouped together. The second approach would be to add computer technicians as the 39th profession in the list of mandated reporters. B. Penalties According to current California law, the penalty for any violation of his/her obligation by any mandatory reporter to report suspected child abuse is a fine of $1,000 and/or six months in jail.24 C. Enforcement and Compliance Computer technicians would have the same training requirements as all other mandated reporters as specified in current California law, which is that employers are strongly encouraged to provide their employees who are mandated reporters with training in the duties imposed by the law. Training for computer technicians would focus on the definition of child pornography, identifying child sexual abuse images and videos, and the process of notifying law enforcement. The K.I.D.S. Coalition would work with technology industry associations, law enforcement and the media to publicize the requirements of the new law and to help companies gain access to training materials. Currently there are several web sites that provide free training materials for mandated reporters of child abuse and neglect. D. Fiscal Effects In 2007, the senate appropriations committee attached a cost of $23,000 to a past attempt to pass this legislation (e.g., AB1475); that was the cost of putting one computer technician in jail for not reporting. However, with the October 1, 2011 implementation of AB109, which states 24 CA Penal Code Section 11166.(c). Retrieved from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-‐ bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=11001-‐12000&file=11164-‐11174.3z

12 | P a g e

that local communities take custody of non-‐violent, non-‐serious and non-‐sexual offenders, the K.I.D.S. Coalition proposal would add NO COST to the state for the criminalization of one computer technician failing to report.

SUMMARY California law currently requires (e.g. mandates) people in certain professions, including commercial film and photographic print processors, to report child abuse or neglect. In today’s digital age, however, laws designed for traditional ‘print’ media are simply no longer adequate. The CA K.I.D.S. Coalition proposes amending penal code section 11165.7 to bring it into the digital age by including computer technicians to the list of 38 mandatory reporters of child abuse and neglect.

13 | P a g e

References Bourke, M. L., & Hernandez, A. E. (2008). The ‘butner study’ redux: A report of the incidence of hands on child victimization by child pornography offenders. The Journal of Family Violence, 24, 183-‐191. doi: 10.1007/s10896-‐008-‐9219-‐y. Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act. California Penal Code Section 11164-‐11174.3. Retrieved from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-‐bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=11001-‐ 12000&file=11164-‐11174.3 Darkness to Light. (n.d.). What are the long term consequences of child sexual abuse? Retreived from http://www.d2l.org/site/c.4dICIJOkGcISE/b.6250811/k.B97D/ What_are_the_Long_Term_Consequences_of_Child_Sexual_Abuse.htm National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. (2007, November 26). NCMEC commentary. Retrieved from http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/ PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=3463 United States Department of Justice. (2006, May). Child pornography on the Internet. (Office of Community Oriented Policing Services; Problem-‐Oriented Guides for Police Problem-‐ Specific Guides Series No. 41). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. United States Department of Justice. (2010). The national strategy for child exploitation prevention and interdiction: A report to Congress. Or see also: United Nations. (2000). Report of the special rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. Najat M’jid Maalla. A/HRC/12/23. 13 July 2009. United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary. (2008, April 4). Challenges and Solutions for Protecting our Children from Violence and Exploitation in the 21st Century. Testimony of Special Agent Flint Waters, Lead Agent for the Wyoming Internet Crimes Against Children

14 | P a g e

Task Force, Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation, Office of the Attorney General. Retrieved from www.judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/08-‐04-‐16WatersTestimony.pdf.

15 | P a g e

Attachment B

CA K.I.D.S. COALITION (Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe) Encouraging & Protecting Computer Technicians in California to Report Child Abuse

ALARMING FACTS: A 2005 Department of Justice study of child pornography possessors arrested in Internet-‐related crimes revealed1: § 96% had images on hard drives or removable media. § ONLY 18% possessed images in photographs, books or magazines. § 55% were “dual offenders” meaning they also committed or attempted to commit hands on sexual abuse of a child. § 83% had images of prepubescent children and 80% of images graphically depicted sexual penetration. § 19% had images of toddlers or infants younger than 3.

What is child pornography? Under federal law (18 U.S.C. §2256), child pornography is defined as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct (e.g., actual or simulated sexual intercourse) that involves a minor. Online exploitation of children is big business. § 9.6 million images and videos of child pornography have been catalogued; millions more yet to be identified.2 § 3 billion dollar industry annually in the U.S.3 § 200 new images of children being sexually abused are circulated each day to feed market demand.3 California law currently provides civil and criminal liability protection to people in certain professions, including film and photographic print processors, to report child abuse or neglect. In today’s digital age, however, laws designed for traditional ‘print’ media are simply no longer adequate. It’s time that we update the law!

When was the last time you developed a roll of film? THE PROBLEM: Advances in technology have allowed for millions of children to be sexually abused, photographed and filmed, and for those crime scene images to then be traded and sold over the Internet. California law has not been updated to account for the digital age and the protection of our children.

THE SOLUTION: Computer technicians are on the front lines of witnessing child sexual abuse images and videos. We must amend penal code 11165.7 to include technicians in the list of 38 mandatory reporters of child abuse and neglect and provide them with civil and criminal liability protection.

TEN STATES HAVE ALEADY MADE THE C HANGE

Currently, ten other states have modernized outdated statutes to include

computer technicians as mandatory reporters of child abuse and neglect,

California should be the next state to take this important step to help prevent the sexual abuse of children!

recognizing the dramatic impact the Internet and digital technology have

had on the sexual exploitation of children.

Alaska

Mississippi

Oklahoma

Illinois

Missouri

Oregon

Michigan

North Carolina

South Carolina

South Dakota

COALITION M EMBERS & SUPPORTERS The CA K.I.D.S. (Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe) Coalition are members from Community, Parental, Law Enforcement, Technology, Child Abuse & Neglect Organizations and advocating for children's safety and protection in the state of California.

C.A.F.E. Community Alliance For Escondido Child Abuse Prevention Council of Contra Costa County Children's Civil Rights Union The Joyful Child Foundation The Innocent Justice Foundation Just in Time for Foster Youth Promises 2 Kids PROTECT/The National Association to Protect Children

Pending

California Sheriff’s Association Casey Family Programs

KnowledgeCentrix San Diego Police Chiefs & Sheriff’s Association San Diego District Attorney’s Office Voices for Children

BENEFITS TO COMPUTER TECHNICIANS:

§

Takes away the “should I or shouldn’t I say something?” dilemma when finding child pornography.

§

Provides protection from criminal and civil liability.4

§

Provides companies with legal certainty: they know they need to report, how to report, and what will happen when they do report.

Derek Floyd, 619-‐952-‐8395 | Dana Black, 858-‐775-‐8450 Karen Gould, 408-‐966-‐5388 | Meredith Praniewicz, 619-‐971-‐1554 | Christine Houston, 619-‐721-‐7163

Web: www.cakidscoalition.com Email: info@cakidscoalition.com

Twitter: @CAKIDSCoalition

Facebook: CA K.I.D.S. Coalition

References: 1. Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell K. J. (2005). Child-‐pornography possessors arrested in Internet-‐related crimes: Findings from the national juvenile online victimization study.

2. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. (2007, November 26). NCMEC commentary. Retrieved from http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=3463 3. U.S. Department of Justice. (2010). The national strategy for child exploitation prevention and interdiction: A report to Congress. p. 15 or see also: United Nations. (2000). Report of the special rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. Najat M’jid Maalla. A/HRC/12/23. 13 July 2009. 4. California Penal Code 11172 (A). Retrieved from http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/11172.html

Attachment C

Detractors

CA K.I.D.S. Coalition Positional Map

Supporters

Law Enforcement

A.C.L.U.1

Senate Public Safety Committee4

Prosecutors

Child Advocates

Technology Industry3

Child Protective Services (CPS)2

Notes: 1. Significant opposition to this proposed legislation has yet to appear. Prior attempts to pass this legislation showed opposition from the adult pornography industry, however language was changed and our language would emulate the same language. The A.C.L.U. generally opposes legislation it perceives as invasion of privacy (e.g., computer technician looking at client’s digital files). 2. Child Protective Services (CPS) has presented opposition during our initial coalition building, but we determined that was due to confusion about increase in workload for them if this were to become law. Computer technicians would not report to CPS – they would report to law enforcement directly. 3. Initial feedback from the technology industry ranges from "the tech. industry wants this" to "this might cost more overhead and open up liability.” Many have existing internal policies, and would like to see bill language before committing support. 4. In ’07-‐’08, Senate Public Safety referred AB1475 to Senate Appropriations, which attached a cost of $23,000, the cost of one technician failing to report, a penalty of 6-‐months in prison and/or a $1,000 fine. Due to passage of AB109 (state prison re-‐ alignment), this would no longer be a state cost. We still see Senate Public Safety as our major hurdle to passage, however, feedback from meetings in Sacramento in December and January suggest that a cost would not be attached and that the timing m ight be right for the issue.

Attachment D

We all want to have safe and healthy environments for our children. The Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe (K.I.D.S.) Coalition strives to keep our children safe from sexual predators. In 2007, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, a nonprofit mandated by Congress to catalogue child sexual abuse images, had identified more than 9.6 million images and videos of child pornography[i]. Currently, the state of California requires commercial film developers to report sexual crimes against children. California law does not protect or require computer technicians to report child abuse images or child pornography. However, a 2005 study funded by the Department of Justice found that 96% of perpetrators arrested for child pornography had images on hard drives or removable media, while only 18% possessed images in print format[ii]. When is the last time you developed a roll of film? With the surge of Internet usage, more and more children are being abused. The child pornography industry generates over 3 billion dollars annually, and more than 200 new images are circulated each day to drive that market[iii]. A 2005 study funded by the Department of Justice found a high correlation between those viewing images and those committing hands-on abuse of children: 55 percent of people arrested for Internet-related crimes were dual offenders[iv]. The K.I.D.S. Coalition's proposed solution to protect our children from sexual abuse is to update existing California penal code 11165.7 by adding commercial computer and cellular phone technicians to the list of 38 mandated reporters. California would be the 11th state in the nation to adopt this law and protect our children in the digital age. ______________________________________________________________________________ National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. (2007, November 26). NCEMC commentary. Retrieved from http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageI d=3463 [i]

Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell K. J. (2005). Child-pornography possessors arrested in Internet-related crimes: Findings from the national juvenile online victimization study. (p. 6) [ii]

[iii] U.S. Department of Justice. (2010). The national strategy for child exploitation prevention and interdiction: A report to Congress. (p. 15) or see also: United Nations. (2000). Report of the special rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. Najat Mâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;jid Maalla. A/HRC/12/23. 13 July 2009. [iv]

Ibid. ii, p. 16

CA K.I.D.S. COALITION (Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe) Encouraging & Protecting Computer Technicians in California to Report Child Abuse

FAX TRANSMITTAL

Date: To: Office: Fax Number: From: Re: Number of Pages including the Cover Sheet:

REMARKS / COMMENTS

CA K.I.D.S. [Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe] Coalition Protecting Innocence In the Digital Age

Mandating Computer Technicians to Report Child Abuse www.cakidscoalition.com | Twitter: @CAKIDSCoalition | Facebook: CA K.I.D.S. Coalition

Memorandum of Understanding Between CA Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe (K.I.D.S.) Coalition And (Partnering Organization)

This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) establishes the partnership between CA Keeping Innocence Digitally Safe Coalition (hereinafter K.I.D.S. Coalition.) and _____________________________________. I.

MISSION

The K.I.D.S. Coalition seeks to amend California penal code §11165.7 to bring it into the Digital Age by including computer technicians on the list of 38 mandated reporters of child abuse and neglect. Brief statement of the mission of the other organization Together, the parties enter into this Memorandum of Understanding to mutually promote adding computer and cellular phone technicians as mandatory reporters of child abuse. Accordingly, K.I.D.S. Coalition and (name of partnering organization), operating under this MOU agree as follows: II.

PURPOSE & SCOPE

_________________________________ is to support the aforementioned mission as to implement the provisions of the proposed amendment to California penal code §11165.7. _________________________________ permits K.I.D.S. Coalition to use its name and logo in support of amending California penal code §11165.7 in oral and written communications, including but not limited to oral communication to elected officials, news broadcasting sources and written communication including brochures, pamphlets, informative materials, and online website content. K.I.D.S. Coalition agrees to provide partnering agency with copies of all materials to be disseminated orally or through written materials. III.

TERMS OF UNDERSTANDING

The term of this MOU is for a period of one year from the effective date of this agreement and may be extended upon written mutual agreement. Either organization may terminate this MOU upon thirty (30) days written notice without penalties or liabilities. The signing of this MOU is not a formal undertaking. It implies that the signatories will strive to reach, to the best of their ability, the objectives stated in the MOU. On behalf of the

organization, we agree to the conditions aforementioned above.

______________________________________ Name, Title

__________________________ Date

______________________________________ Name, Title, K.I.D.S Coalition

__________________________ Date

Attachment E

SUMMARY OF STATE STATUTES REGARDING MANDATORY REPORTERS OF CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT WHICH INCLUDE COMPUTER AND/OR CELLULAR PHONE TECHNICIANS Prepared December 15, 2011

Contents

Page

Alaska…………………………………………………………………………….. 2 Illinois…………………………………………………………………………….. 4 Michigan…………………………………………………………………………. 6 Mississippi………………..………………………………………………………. 6 Missouri…………………………….…………………………………………….. 10 North Carolina…………………………….……………………………………… 13 Oklahoma…………………………………..…………………………………….. 14 Oregon……………………………………………………………………………. 14 South Carolina……………………………………………………………………. 15 South Dakota……………………………………………………………………… 16

ALASKA Alaska Stat. 47.14.020 (2011) (a) The following persons who, in the performance of their occupational duties, or with respect to (8) of this subsection, in the performance of their appointed duties, have reasonable cause to suspect that a child has suffered harm as a result of child abuse or neglect shall immediately report the harm to the nearest office of the department: (1) practitioners of the healing arts; (2) school teachers and school administrative staff members of public and private schools; (3) peace officers and officers of the Department of Corrections; (4) administrative officers of institutions; (5) child care providers; (6) paid employees of domestic violence and sexual assault programs, and crisis intervention and prevention programs as defined in AS 18.66.990; (7) paid employees of an organization that provides counseling or treatment to individuals seeking to control their use of drugs or alcohol; (8) members of a child fatality review team established under AS 12.65.015(e) or 12.65.120 or the multidisciplinary child protection team created under AS 47.14.300. (b) This section does not prohibit the named persons from reporting cases that have come to their attention in their nonoccupational capacities, nor does it prohibit any other person from reporting a child's harm that the person has reasonable cause to suspect is a result of child abuse or neglect. These reports shall be made to the nearest office of the department. (c) If the person making a report of harm under this section cannot reasonably contact the nearest office of the department and immediate action is necessary for the well-being of the child, the person shall make the report to a peace officer. The peace officer shall immediately take action to protect the child and shall, at the earliest opportunity, notify the nearest office of the department. (d) This section does not require a religious healing practitioner to report as neglect of a child the failure to provide medical attention to the child if the child is provided treatment solely by

spiritual means through prayer in accordance with the tenets and practices of a recognized church or religious denomination by an accredited practitioner of the church or denomination. (e) The department shall immediately notify the nearest law enforcement agency if the department (1) concludes that the harm was caused by a person who is not responsible for the child's welfare; (2) is unable to determine (A) who caused the harm to the child; or (B) whether the person who is believed to have caused the harm has responsibility for the child's welfare; or (3) concludes that the report involves (A) possible criminal conduct under AS 11.41.410 -- 11.41.458; or (B) abuse or neglect that results in the need for medical treatment of the child. (f) If a law enforcement agency determines that a child has been abused or neglected and that (1) the harm was caused by a teacher or other person employed by the school or school district in which the child is enrolled as a student, (2) the harm occurred during an activity sponsored by the school or school district in which the child is enrolled as a student, or (3) the harm occurred on the premises of the school in which the child is enrolled as a student or on the premises of a school within the district in which the child is enrolled as a student, the law enforcement agency shall notify the chief administrative officer of the school or district in which the child is enrolled immediately after the agency determines that a child has been abused or neglected under the circumstances set out in this section, except that if the person about whom the report has been made is the chief administrative officer or a member of the chief administrative officer's immediate family, the law enforcement agency shall notify the commissioner of education and early development that the child has been abused or neglected under the circumstances set out in this section. The notification must set out the factual basis for the law enforcement agency's determination. If the notification involves a person in the teaching profession, as defined in AS 14.20.370, the law enforcement agency shall send a copy of the notification to the Professional Teaching Practices Commission. (g) A person required to report child abuse or neglect under (a) of this section who makes the

report to the person's job supervisor or to another individual working for the entity that employs the person is not relieved of the obligation to make the report to the department as required under (a) of this section. (h) This section does not require a person required to report child abuse or neglect under (a)(6) of this section to report mental injury to a child as a result of exposure to domestic violence so long as the person has reasonable cause to believe that the child is in safe and appropriate care and not presently in danger of mental injury as a result of exposure to domestic violence. (i) This section does not require a person required to report child abuse or neglect under (a)(7) of this section to report the resumption of use of an intoxicant as described in AS 47.10.011(10) so long as the person does not have reasonable cause to suspect that a child has suffered harm as a result of the resumption.

ALASKA STAT. ยง 47.17.023 (2011) Reports from certain persons regarding child pornography. A person providing, either privately or commercially, film, photo, or visual or printed matter processing, production, or finishing services or computer installation, repair, or other services, or Internet or cellular telephone services who, in the process of providing those services, observes a film, photo, picture, computer file, image, or other matter and has reasonable cause to suspect that the film, photo, picture, computer file, image, or other matter visually depicts a child engaged in conduct described in AS 11.41.455(a) shall immediately report the observation to the nearest law enforcement agency and provide the law enforcement agency with all information known about the nature and origin of the film, photo, picture, computer file, image, or other matter. ILLINOIS 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/11-20.2 (2011)Duty to report child pornography. Duty to report child pornography. (a) Any commercial film and photographic print processor or computer technician who has knowledge of or observes, within the scope of his professional capacity or employment, any film, photograph, videotape, negative, slide, computer hard drive or any other magnetic or optical media which depicts a child whom the processor or computer technician knows or reasonably should know to be under the age of 18 where such child is: (i) actually or by simulation engaged in any act of sexual penetration or sexual conduct with any person or animal; or (ii) actually or by simulation engaged in any act of sexual penetration or sexual conduct

involving the sex organs of the child and the mouth, anus, or sex organs of another person or animal; or which involves the mouth, anus or sex organs of the child and the sex organs of another person or animal; or (iii) actually or by simulation engaged in any act of masturbation; or (iv) actually or by simulation portrayed as being the object of, or otherwise engaged in, any act of lewd fondling, touching, or caressing involving another person or animal; or (v) actually or by simulation engaged in any act of excretion or urination within a sexual context; or (vi) actually or by simulation portrayed or depicted as bound, fettered, or subject to sadistic, masochistic, or sadomasochistic abuse in any sexual context; or (vii) depicted or portrayed in any pose, posture or setting involving a lewd exhibition of the unclothed or transparently clothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or, if such person is female, a fully or partially developed breast of the child or other person; shall report or cause a report to be made pursuant to subsections (b) and (c) as soon as reasonably possible. Failure to make such report shall be a business offense with a fine of $ 1,000. (b) Commercial film and photographic film processors shall report or cause a report to be made to the local law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction in which the image or images described in subsection (a) are discovered. (c) Computer technicians shall report or cause the report to be made to the local law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction in which the image or images described in subsection (a) are discovered or to the Illinois Child Exploitation e-Tipline at reportchildporn@atg.state.il.us. (d) Reports required by this Act shall include the following information: (i) name, address, and telephone number of the person filing the report; (ii) the employer of the person filing the report, if any; (iii) the name, address and telephone number of the person whose property is the subject of the report, if known; (iv) the circumstances which led to the filing of the report, including a description of the reported content. (e) If a report is filed with the Cyber Tipline at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children or in accordance with the requirements of 42 U.S.C. 13032, the requirements of this Act will be deemed to have been met.

(f) A computer technician or an employer caused to report child pornography under this Section is immune from any criminal, civil, or administrative liability in connection with making the report, except for willful or wanton misconduct. (g) For the purposes of this Section, a "computer technician" is a person who installs, maintains, troubleshoots, repairs or upgrades computer hardware, software, computer networks, peripheral equipment, electronic mail systems, or provides user assistance for any of the aforementioned tasks.

MICHIGAN Mich. Comp. Laws ยง 750.145c <http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.asp?page=getObject&objName=mcl-750-145c> (9). Definitions; child sexually abusive activity or material; penalties; possession of child sexually abusive material; expert testimony; defenses; acts of commercial film or photographic print processor; report to law enforcement agency by computer technician; applicability and uniformity of section; enactment or enforcement of ordinances, rules, or regulations prohibited. ... (9) If a computer technician reports to a law enforcement agency having jurisdiction his or her knowledge or observation, within the scope of his or her professional capacity or employment, of an electronic visual image, computer-generated image or picture or sound recording depicting a person that the computer technician has reason to know or reason to believe is a child engaged in a listed sexual act; furnishes a copy of that image, picture, or sound recording to the law enforcement agency; or keeps the image, picture, or sound recording according to the law enforcement agency's instructions, both of the following shall apply: (a) The identity of the computer technician shall be confidential, subject to disclosure only with his or her consent or by judicial process. (b) If the computer technician acted in good faith, he or she shall be immune from civil liability that might otherwise be incurred by his or her actions. This immunity extends only to acts described in this subsection.

MISSISSIPPI Miss. Code Ann. ยง 43-21-353 (2011). Duty to inform state agencies and officials; duty to inform individual about whom report has been made of specific allegations. (1) Any attorney, physician, dentist, intern, resident, nurse, psychologist, social worker, family protection worker, family protection specialist, child caregiver, minister, law enforcement

officer, public or private school employee , commercial photographic film processor, computer repair technician or any other person having reasonable cause to suspect that a child is a neglected child or an abused child, shall cause an oral report to be made immediately by telephone or otherwise and followed as soon thereafter as possible by a report in writing to the Department of Human Services, and immediately a referral shall be made by the Department of Human Services to the youth court intake unit, which unit shall promptly comply with Section 43-21-357. In the course of an investigation, at the initial time of contact with the individual(s) about whom a report has been made under this Youth Court Act or with the individual(s) responsible for the health or welfare of a child about whom a report has been made under this chapter, the Department of Human Services shall inform the individual of the specific complaints or allegations made against the individual. Consistent with subsection (4), the identity of the person who reported his or her suspicion shall not be disclosed. Where appropriate, the Department of Human Services shall additionally make a referral to the youth court prosecutor.

Upon receiving a report that a child has been sexually abused, or burned, tortured, mutilated or otherwise physically abused in such a manner as to cause serious bodily harm, or upon receiving any report of abuse that would be a felony under state or federal law, the Department of Human Services shall immediately notify the law enforcement agency in whose jurisdiction the abuse occurred and shall notify the appropriate prosecutor within forty-eight (48) hours, and the Department of Human Services shall have the duty to provide the law enforcement agency all the names and facts known at the time of the report; this duty shall be of a continuing nature. The law enforcement agency and the Department of Human Services shall investigate the reported abuse immediately and shall file a preliminary report with the appropriate prosecutor's office within twenty-four (24) hours and shall make additional reports as new or additional information or evidence becomes available. The Department of Human Services shall advise the clerk of the youth court and the youth court prosecutor of all cases of abuse reported to the department within seventy-two (72) hours and shall update such report as information becomes available.

(2) Any report to the Department of Human Services shall contain the names and addresses of the child and his parents or other persons responsible for his care, if known, the child's age, the nature and extent of the child's injuries, including any evidence of previous injuries and any other information that might be helpful in establishing the cause of the injury and the identity of the perpetrator.

(3) The Department of Human Services shall maintain a statewide incoming wide-area telephone service or similar service for the purpose of receiving reports of suspected cases of child abuse; provided that any attorney, physician, dentist, intern, resident, nurse, psychologist, social worker,

family protection worker, family protection specialist, child caregiver, minister, law enforcement officer or public or private school employee who is required to report under subsection (1) of this section shall report in the manner required in subsection (1).

(4) Reports of abuse and neglect made under this chapter and the identity of the reporter are confidential except when the court in which the investigation report is filed, in its discretion, determines the testimony of the person reporting to be material to a judicial proceeding or when the identity of the reporter is released to law enforcement agencies and the appropriate prosecutor pursuant to subsection (1). Reports made under this section to any law enforcement agency or prosecutorial officer are for the purpose of criminal investigation and prosecution only and no information from these reports may be released to the public except as provided by Section 43-21-261. Disclosure of any information by the prosecutor shall be according to the Mississippi Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court Procedure. The identity of the reporting party shall not be disclosed to anyone other than law enforcement officers or prosecutors without an order from the appropriate youth court. Any person disclosing any reports made under this section in a manner not expressly provided for in this section or Section 43-21-261, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to the penalties prescribed by Section 43-21-267.

(5) All final dispositions of law enforcement investigations described in subsection (1) of this section shall be determined only by the appropriate prosecutor or court. All final dispositions of investigations by the Department of Human Services as described in subsection (1) of this section shall be determined only by the youth court. Reports made under subsection (1) of this section by the Department of Human Services to the law enforcement agency and to the district attorney's office shall include the following, if known to the department:

(a) The name and address of the child;

(b) The names and addresses of the parents;

(d) The names and addresses of all witnesses, including the reporting party if a material witness to the abuse;

(e) A brief statement of the facts indicating that the child has been abused and any other information from the agency files or known to the family protection worker or family protection specialist making the investigation, including medical records or other records, which may assist law enforcement or the district attorney in investigating and/or prosecuting the case; and

(f) What, if any, action is being taken by the Department of Human Services.

(6) In any investigation of a report made under this chapter of the abuse or neglect of a child as defined in Section 43-21-105(m), the Department of Human Services may request the appropriate law enforcement officer with jurisdiction to accompany the department in its investigation, and in such cases the law enforcement officer shall comply with such request.

(7) Anyone who willfully violates any provision of this section shall be, upon being found guilty, punished by a fine not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($ 5,000.00), or by imprisonment in jail not to exceed one (1) year, or both.

(8) If a report is made directly to the Department of Human Services that a child has been abused or neglected in an out-of-home setting, a referral shall be made immediately to the law enforcement agency in whose jurisdiction the abuse occurred and the department shall notify the district attorney's office within forty-eight (48) hours of such report. The Department of Human Services shall investigate the out-of-home setting report of abuse or neglect to determine whether the child who is the subject of the report, or other children in the same environment, comes within the jurisdiction of the youth court and shall report to the youth court the department's findings and recommendation as to whether the child who is the subject of the report or other children in the same environment require the protection of the youth court. The law enforcement agency shall investigate the reported abuse immediately and shall file a preliminary report with the district attorney's office within forty-eight (48) hours and shall make additional reports as new information or evidence becomes available. If the out-of-home setting is a licensed facility, an additional referral shall be made by the Department of Human Services to the licensing agency. The licensing agency shall investigate the report and shall provide the Department of Human Services, the law enforcement agency and the district attorney's office with their written findings from such investigation as well as that licensing agency's recommendations and actions taken.

MISSOURI Mo. Rev. Stat. ยง 191.737 (2011). Children exposed to substance abuse, referral by physician to department of health and senior services -- services to be initiated within seventy-two hours -physician making referral immune from civil liability -- confidentiality of report. 1. Notwithstanding the physician-patient privilege, any physician or health care provider may refer to the department of health and senior services families in which children may have been exposed to a controlled substance listed in section 195.017, RSMo, schedules I, II and III, or alcohol as evidenced by: (1) Medical documentation of signs and symptoms consistent with controlled substances or alcohol exposure in the child at birth; or (2) Results of a confirmed toxicology test for controlled substances performed at birth on the mother or the child; and (3) A written assessment made or approved by a physician, health care provider, or by the division of family services which documents the child as being at risk of abuse or neglect. 2. Nothing in this section shall preclude a physician or other mandated reporter from reporting abuse or neglect of a child as required pursuant to the provisions of section 210.115, RSMo. 3. Upon notification pursuant to subsection 1 of this section, the department of health and senior services shall offer service coordination services to the family. The department of health and senior services shall coordinate social services, health care, mental health services, and needed education and rehabilitation services. Service coordination services shall be initiated within seventy-two hours of notification. The department of health and senior services shall notify the department of social services and the department of mental health within seventy-two hours of initial notification. 4. Any physician or health care provider complying with the provisions of this section, in good faith, shall have immunity from any civil liability that might otherwise result by reason of such actions. 5. Referral and associated documentation provided for in this section shall be confidential and shall not be used in any criminal prosecution. MO. REV. STAT. ยง 210.115 (2011). Reports of abuse, neglect, and under age eighteen deaths -persons required to report -- deaths required to be reported to the division or child fatality review panel, when -- report made to another state, when 1. When any physician, medical examiner, coroner, dentist, chiropractor, optometrist, podiatrist, resident, intern, nurse, hospital or clinic personnel that are engaged in the examination, care,

treatment or research of persons, and any other health practitioner, psychologist, mental health professional, social worker, day care center worker or other child-care worker, juvenile officer, probation or parole officer, jail or detention center personnel, teacher, principal or other school official, minister as provided by section 352.400, RSMo, peace officer or law enforcement official, or other person with responsibility for the care of children has reasonable cause to suspect that a child has been or may be subjected to abuse or neglect or observes a child being subjected to conditions or circumstances which would reasonably result in abuse or neglect, that person shall immediately report or cause a report to be made to the division in accordance with the provisions of sections 210.109 to 210.183. As used in this section, the term "abuse" is not limited to abuse inflicted by a person responsible for the child's care, custody and control as specified in section 210.110, but shall also include abuse inflicted by any other person.

2. Whenever such person is required to report pursuant to sections 210.109 to 210.183 in an official capacity as a staff member of a medical institution, school facility, or other agency, whether public or private, the person in charge or a designated agent shall be notified immediately. The person in charge or a designated agent shall then become responsible for immediately making or causing such report to be made to the division. Nothing in this section, however, is meant to preclude any person from reporting abuse or neglect.

3. Notwithstanding any other provision of sections 210.109 to 210.183, any child who does not receive specified medical treatment by reason of the legitimate practice of the religious belief of the child's parents, guardian, or others legally responsible for the child, for that reason alone, shall not be found to be an abused or neglected child, and such parents, guardian or other persons legally responsible for the child shall not be entered into the central registry. However, the division may accept reports concerning such a child and may subsequently investigate or conduct a family assessment as a result of that report. Such an exception shall not limit the administrative or judicial authority of the state to ensure that medical services are provided to the child when the child's health requires it.

4. In addition to those persons and officials required to report actual or suspected abuse or neglect, any other person may report in accordance with sections 210.109 to 210.183 if such person has reasonable cause to suspect that a child has been or may be subjected to abuse or neglect or observes a child being subjected to conditions or circumstances which would reasonably result in abuse or neglect.

5. Any person or official required to report pursuant to this section, including employees of the division, who has probable cause to suspect that a child who is or may be under the age of eighteen, who is eligible to receive a certificate of live birth, has died shall report that fact to the appropriate medical examiner or coroner. If, upon review of the circumstances and medical information, the medical examiner or coroner determines that the child died of natural causes while under medical care for an established natural disease, the coroner, medical examiner or physician shall notify the division of the child's death and that the child's attending physician shall be signing the death certificate. In all other cases, the medical examiner or coroner shall accept the report for investigation, shall immediately notify the division of the child's death as required in section 58.452, RSMo, and shall report the findings to the child fatality review panel established pursuant to section 210.192.

6. Any person or individual required to report may also report the suspicion of abuse or neglect to any law enforcement agency or juvenile office. Such report shall not, however, take the place of reporting or causing a report to be made to the division.

7. If an individual required to report suspected instances of abuse or neglect pursuant to this section has reason to believe that the victim of such abuse or neglect is a resident of another state or was injured as a result of an act which occurred in another state, the person required to report such abuse or neglect may, in lieu of reporting to the Missouri division of family services, make such a report to the child protection agency of the other state with the authority to receive such reports pursuant to the laws of such other state. If such agency accepts the report, no report is required to be made, but may be made, to the Missouri division of family services.

Mo. Rev. Stat 568.110. Duty to report depictions of children engaged in acts of sexual conduct, persons subject to duty--failure to report, penalty--limitation of duty

1. Any film and photographic print processor, computer provider, installer or repair person, or any Internet service provider who has knowledge of or observes, within the scope of the person's professional capacity or employment, any film, photograph, videotape, negative, slide, or computer-generated image or picture depicting a child under the age of eighteen years engaged in an act of sexual conduct shall report such instance to the law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the case immediately or as soon as practically possible.

2. Failure to make such report shall be a class B misdemeanor.

3. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a provider of electronic communication services or remote computing services to monitor any user, subscriber or customer of the provider, or the content of any communication of any user, subscriber or customer of the provider. NORTH CAROLINA N.C. Gen. Stat. ยง 66-67.4 <http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_66/GS_66 -67.4.html>. Film and photographic print processor or computer technician to report film or computer images containing pictures of a minor engaging in sexual activity. (a) As used in this section: (1) "Computer technician" means any person who repairs, installs, or otherwise services any computer or computer network or system for compensation. (2) "Processor of photographic images" means any person who, for compensation: (i) develops exposed photographic film into negatives, slides, or prints; (ii) makes prints from negatives, slides, digital images, or video; or (iii) develops, processes, transfers, edits, or enhances video or digital images. (3) "Minor" has the same meaning as in G.S. 14-190.13. (4) "Sexual activity" has the same meaning as in G.S. 14-190.13. (b) Any processor of photographic images or any computer technician who, within the person's scope of employment, observes an image of a minor or a person who reasonably appears to be a minor engaging in sexual activity shall report the name and address of the person requesting the processing of the film or photographs or the owner or person in possession of the computer or computer network or system to the Cyber Tip Line at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children or to the appropriate law enforcement official in the county or municipality in which the image or film was submitted. (c) An employee of a processor of photographic images or computer technician may satisfy the requirements of this section by reporting the required information to a person designated by the employer. The person designated by the employer shall then report as required by subsection (b) of this section. (d) Any person, their employer, or a third party complying with this section in good faith shall be immune from any civil or criminal liability that might otherwise be incurred as a result of the report. In any proceeding involving liability, good faith is presumed.

OKLAHOMA Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 1021.4<http://www2.lsb.state.ok.us/os/os_21-1021.4.rtf>. Disclosure of obscene materials containing minors. Any commercial film and photographic print processor or commercial computer technician who has knowledge of or observes, within the scope of such person’s professional capacity or employment, any film, photograph, video tape, negative, or slide, or any computer file, recording, CD-Rom, magnetic disk memory, magnetic tape memory, picture, graphic or image that is intentionally saved, transmitted or organized on hardware or any other media including, but not limited to, CDs, DVDs and thumbdrives, whether digital, analog or other means and whether directly viewable, compressed or encoded depicting a child under the age of eighteen (18) years engaged in an act of sexual conduct as defined in Section 1024.1 of this title shall immediately or as soon as possible report by telephone such instance of suspected child abuse or child pornography to the law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the case and shall prepare and send a written report of the incident with an attached copy of such material, within thirty-six (36) hours after receiving the information concerning the incident. OREGON Signed into law May 2011 Ch. 109 H.B. No. 2463 CHILDREN AND MINORS--PORNOGRAPHY--REPORTS AN ACT Relating to reporting child pornography; amending ORS 163.693. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: SECTION 1. ORS 163.693 is amended to read: << OR ST 163.693 >> 163.693. (1) A person commits the crime of failure to report child pornography if the person, in the course of processing or producing a photograph, motion picture, videotape or other visual recording, either commercially or privately, has reasonable cause to believe that the visual recording being processed or produced, or submitted for processing or production, depicts sexually explicit conduct involving a child and fails to report that fact to the appropriate law enforcement agency. (2) Failure to report child pornography is a Class A misdemeanor. (1) As used in this section: (a) “Computer technician” means a person who repairs, installs or otherwise services a computer,

computer network or computer system for compensation. (b) â&#x20AC;&#x153;Processor of photographic imagesâ&#x20AC;? means a person who develops, processes, reproduces, transfers, edits or enhances photographic film into negatives, slides, prints, movies, digital images or video. (2) A processor of photographic images or a computer technician who reasonably believes the processor or technician has observed an image of a child involved in sexually explicit conduct shall report the name and address, if known, of the person requesting the processing or of the owner or person in possession of the computer, computer network or computer system to: (a) The CyberTipline at the National Center for Missing and Exploited children; (b) The local office of the Department of Human Services; or (c) A law enforcement agency within the county where the processor or technician making the report is located at the time the image is observed. (3) Nothing in this section requires a processor of photographic images or a computer technician to monitor any user, subscriber or customer or to search for prohibited materials or media. (4) Any person, their employer or a third party complying with this section in good faith shall be immune from civil or criminal liability in connection with making the report, except for willful or wanton misconduct. (5) A person commits the crime of failure to report child pornography if the person violates the provisions of this section. (6) Failure to report child pornography is a Class A misdemeanor. Approved May 19, 2011

SOUTH CAROLINA S.C. Code Ann. Â§ 63-7-310 (20011). Persons required to report. . (A) A physician, nurse, dentist, optometrist, medical examiner, or coroner, or an employee of a county medical examiner's or coroner's office, or any other medical, emergency medical services, mental health, or allied health professional, member of the clergy including a Christian Science Practitioner or religious healer, school teacher, counselor, principal, assistant principal, school attendance officer, school administrator, social or public assistance worker, substance abuse treatment staff, or childcare worker in a childcare center or foster care facility, foster parent, police or law enforcement officer, juvenile justice worker, undertaker, funeral home director or employee of a funeral home, persons responsible for processing films, computer technician, or a judge , or guardian ad litem for a child must report in accordance with this section when in the

person's professional capacity the person has received information which gives the person reason to believe that a child has been or may be abused or neglected as defined in Section 63-7-20. (B) If a person required to report pursuant to subsection (A) has received information in the person's professional capacity which gives the person reason to believe that a child's physical or mental health or welfare has been or may be adversely affected by acts or omissions that would be child abuse or neglect if committed by a parent, guardian, or other person responsible for the child's welfare, but the reporter believes that the act or omission was committed by a person other than the parent, guardian, or other person responsible for the child's welfare, the reporter must make a report to the appropriate law enforcement agency. (C) Except as provided in subsection (A), any person who has reason to believe that a child's physical or mental health or welfare has been or may be adversely affected by abuse and neglect may report, and is encouraged to report, in accordance with this section. (D) Reports of child abuse or neglect may be made orally by telephone or otherwise to the county department of social services or to a law enforcement agency in the county where the child resides or is found.â&#x20AC;?

SOUTH DAKOTA

S.D. Codified Laws Â§ 22-2224.18<http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/DisplayStatute.aspx?Type=Statute&Statute=22-22-24.18>. Computer repair technicians to report suspected violations of child pornography laws - Penalty. Any commercial computer repair technician who has knowledge of or observes, within the scope of the technician's professional capacity or employment, a film, photograph, video tape, negative, slide or other visual depiction of a minor whom the technician knows or reasonably should know to be under the age of eighteen, engaged in prohibited sexual acts or in the simulation of prohibited sexual acts, shall report the depiction to an appropriate law enforcement agency as soon as reasonably possible. The computer repair technician need not report to law enforcement depictions involving mere nudity of the minor, but shall report visual depictions involving prohibited sexual acts. This section may not be construed to require a computer repair technician to review all data, disks, or tapes delivered to the computer repair technician within the computer repair technician's professional capacity or employment.

Attachment F

HOME PAGE:

CA K.I.D.S. Coalition Website Screenshots www.cakidscoalition.com

FAST FACTS:

NEWS & RESEARCH:

GET INVOLVED:

Attachment G

CA K.I.D.S. Coalition Facebook Screenshot http://www.facebook.com/pages/CA-‐KIDS-‐Coalition/121015321344600

Attachment H

CA K.I.D.S. Coalition Twitter Screenshot https://twitter.com/CAKIDSCoalition

Attachment I

CA K.I.D.S. Coalition Online Petition Screenshot http://www.change.org/petitions/ca-‐state-‐legislature-‐include-‐computer-‐technicians-‐as-‐mandatory-‐reporters-‐of-‐child-‐abuse

Attachment J

CA K.I.D.S. COALITION -‐‑ California State Legislative Visits Monday, January 9, 2012 SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS

9:00 AM

9:30 AM

10:00 AM

Meeting with Selena from Senator Ron Calderon – Capitol – Room 5066 GROUP: Dana Black, Meredith P. Notes: moderate Dem – LA; Senate Public Safety; expressed interest in authoring; Select Committee on Film and Television Industries; member of the California Film Commission; ask to author.

Meeting with Sebastian, public safety advisor for Senator Curren Price – Capitol – Room 2057 GROUP: Karen Gould, Derek Floyd *** POSSIBLE AUTHOR Notes: Moderate/progressive Dem from LA/Hollywood; Senate Public Safety & Appropriations; got 12 of 15 bills passed last year; has power to get it done; ask to author. Meeting with Curtis Notsinneh, public safety advisor for Assemblymember Tom Ammiano – Capitol – Room 4005 GROUP: Dana Black, Karen Gould ** POSSIBLE AUTHOR Notes: Dem – San Francisco; Chair, Assembly Public Safety; member of gay caucus with Kehoe; close friend of Kehoe and she, as Chair of Sen. Appropriations, may help if he authored and bill was sent to Senate Appropriations; ask to author

Meeting with Kody, public safety advisor for Assemblymember Toni Atkins – Capitol – Room 4146 GROUP: Derek Floyd, Christine Houston, Meredith P. POSSIBLE AUTHOR Notes: Dem – San Diego; Met with Gibran in San Diego office; Gibran said Kody will like our research; show San Diego DA, Chiefs & Sheriff’s support; ask to author Tour with Howard & Pat – meet in Atkins Office Room 4146 GROUP: Kyra, Vanessa, Kim, Summer

10:00 AM

Meeting with Tony Bui, public safety advisor for Assemblymember Nancy Skinner’s office — Capitol -‐‑ Room 4126 GROUP: Christine Houston, Meredith P. Notes: Dem -‐‑ Berkeley (Contra Costa County); Assembly Public Safety; Champion of Environmental issues; Our meeting is to inform Member this issue will come across her committee, please support. We have support from Child Abuse Prevention Council of Contra Costa County – Carol Carrillo, Executive Director– Karen secured this – check with her.

Meeting with Sue Vang, public safety advisor for Senator Loni Hancock’s office — Capitol -‐‑ Room 2082 GROUP: Dana Black, Karen Gould, Derek Floyd POSSIBLE AUTHOR Notes: Dem-‐‑Oakland; Chair Senate Public Safety; she controls committee where past attempts failed; ask to author; the following about her position is from her website: Senator Hancock has been a leading advocate for investing state resources in rehabilitation programs, job training, and employment because she understands that these and similar programs reduce inmate recidivism. As Chair of the Senate Public Safety Committee and the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee #5 on Corrections and Public Safety, Senator Hancock seeks to examine programs at all levels of the criminal justice system and implement sound policies that reduce prison overcrowding while protecting public safety. (This may be our challenge) Senator Hancock believes that California’s corrections system is an expensive failure and requires a fundamental restructuring. As a start, Senator Hancock is working to bring government closer to the people by allowing local governments to carry out vital law enforcement services in a more effective and efficient manner. Senator Hancock has introduced legislation to provide case management and evidence-‐‑based programming to inmates in their last year of incarceration, and bring transparency and accountability to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the Office of the Inspector General. Previously, she has introduced legislation to improve education programs in state prison and require the CDCR to provide inmates with a CA identification card upon release of incarceration.

10:30 AM

11:00 AM

Meeting with Nora Lynn or Laura Galvez representatives for Senator Elaine Alquist’s office — Capitol -‐‑ Room 5080 GROUP: Dana Black, Meredith P. Notes: Dem, Silicon Valley; Senate Appropriations; A lifetime champion of crime victims, and the first woman to chair the Senate Public Safety Committee, she authored ground breaking legislation that makes it easier to protect our children from sexual predators, and strengthens state oversight of sex offenders. Sen. Alquist also sits on the Domestic Violence Advisory Council. We should find out who supported her past legislations to see who may support us. Meeting with Quentin Foster, public safety advisor for Assemblymember Holly Mitchell – Capitol – Room 2176 GROUP: Karen Gould, Derek Floyd, Christine H., Notes: Dem, Los Angeles; Assembly Public Safety; inform Member this issue will come across her committee, please support, get info on any objections and how can we remedy. Mitchell comes to the State Assembly from leadership in California’s non-‐‑profit sector where, as the chief executive officer of Crystal Stairs for seven years prior to taking public office, she championed statewide family-‐‑focused policymaking., Holly Mitchell understands the concerns of working families and advocates legislative policy to meet their needs Meeting with Mufaddal Ezzy, staff member for Senator Darrell Steinberg – Capitol – Room 412 GROUP: Dana Black, Meredith P., Kyra, Summer Notes: Dem, Sacramento; Senate President Pro-‐‑tem; Senate Public Safety & Appropriations; inform Member this issue will come across committee, please support; Mr. Ezzy is not the public safety advisor but is the only staff member available to meet with us. He may invite someone that specializes in policy. Steinberg also is a strong advocate for children and mental health issues. As a member of the State Assembly, Steinberg authored legislation to focus additional education resources on high-‐‑ poverty schools and make them accountable for improvement. He also authored several nationally recognized laws to improve the state'ʹs foster care system, including measures to improve provider accountability, educational consistency, and placement stability for children in foster care

11:30 AM

12:00 PM 1:00 PM

2:00 PM 2:30 PM

Meeting with Ted, public safety advisor for Senator Christine Kehoe – Capitol – Room 5050 (NOTE: we can stop by anytime except noon & 4pm) Group: Dana Black, Derek Floyd Notes: Dem – San Diego; Follow up from Dec. mtg with Tim Shelley, Chief of Staff – who at the time did not seem interested in authoring; inform San Diego DA + Sheriff & Police Chief support; Dana & Karen comment on earlier meeting with Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (Kehoe’s friend).

Chamber Session -‐‑ everyone

Meeting with Jim Hawley from TechNet – Location: 1215 K Street, Suite 1900: corner of 13th and K Street -- behind the Hyatt Hotel GROUP: Dana Black, Derek Floyd, Karen Gould, Meredith P. Christine Houston Notes: TechNet was founded in 1997 by high-‐‑tech’s leading CEOs to create a network of the nation’s strongest voices in the industry to unite with both federal and state leaders in helping to shape the public policies that impact the technology industries. Meeting with Xavier Maltese, public safety advisor for Assemblymember Gil Cedillo’s office – Capitol – Room 5119 GROUP: Meredith, Christine H., Karen, Derek, Dana POSSIBLE AUTHOR Notes: Assembly Public Safety; Dem from Los Angeles; ask to author

Meeting with Robert, public safety advisor for Senator Carol Liu – Capitol – Room 5061 GROUP: Dana, Summer, Kyra, Kim, Vanessa Notes: Senate Public Safety; no bills left; not interested but will meet; meet to inform that this will come across her committee, please support.

3:00 PM 3:00 PM

3:00 PM

4:00 PM

Meeting Assemblymember Sandre Swanson’s office – Capitol – Room 6012 GROUP: Derek Floyd, Karen Gould, Kim Hersbritt Notes: Dem -‐‑ Oakland; has passed legislation increasing the penalties against persons who sexually exploit children for profit.

Meeting with Heidi Jensen & Assemblymember Steve Knight – Capitol – Room 4015 GROUP: Dana Black, Vanessa, Summer Notes: Republican – Palm Dale; Vice-‐‑Chair, Assembly Public Safety; he took over for Runner (who introduced bill in 2006); information gathering meeting. Steve continues to be an advocate for stiff penalties for criminals. A strong advocate for Jessica'ʹs Law (Jessica'ʹs Law enhances the state'ʹs abilities to detect, track and apprehend sexual offenders. Jessica'ʹs Law prohibits sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools and parks), Steve was instrumental in the development of many innovative crime-‐‑ fighting programs for the City of Palmdale. A former police officer in LAPD.

Meeting with Cris Forsyth, Chief of Staff for Assemblymember Jim Beall Capitol – Room 5016 GROUP: Meredith, Derek, Christine, Kim, Kyra Notes: Dem, San Jose; Passed Drug/Alcohol when Galgiani’s Computer Tech’s failed; foster care advocate; find out why his passed when Galgiani’s didn’t pass.

Meeting with Dana Mitchell, consultant, & John Scribner, Chief of Staff for Assemblymember Nora Campos – Capitol – Room 2175 GROUP: Derek Floyd, Dana Black, Karen Gould, Meredith, Christine POSSIBLE AUTHOR Notes: Dem, San Jose; Chair, Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Internet Media; Silicon Valley; looking for bill, crafting language; informally passed by Assembly Public Safety, working on Senate Public Safety; seems very interested; ask to author