U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

44–986 PDF 2008

S. HRG. 110–607 

CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS FOR PROTECTING 

OUR CHILDREN FROM VIOLENCE AND EXPLOITATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND DRUGS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

APRIL 16, 2008 

Serial No. J–110–85 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JON KYL, Arizona 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

BRUCE A. COHEN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

STEPHANIE A. MIDDLETON, Republican Staff Director 

NICHOLAS A. ROSSI, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND DRUGS

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware, Chairman 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

TODD HINNEN, Chief Counsel 

WALT KUHN, Republican Chief Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS 

Page 

Biden, Hon. Joseph R., Jr., a U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware ............. 1 

Feinstein, Hon. Dianne, a U.S. Senator from the State of California, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 100 

Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 113 

Sessions, Hon. Jeff, a U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama .......................... 5 

WITNESSES 

Collins, Michelle, Exploited Child Unit, National Center for Missing and 

Exploited Children, Alexandria, Virginia ........................................................... 25 

Hillman, Randall I., Executive Director, Alabama District Attorney’s Association, Montgomery, Alabama ................................................................................ 23 

Moses, Robert C., Lieutenant, High Technology Crimes Unit, Delaware State 

Police, Dover, Delaware ....................................................................................... 21 

Scott, McGregor, U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of California, Sacramento, 

California .............................................................................................................. 7 

Waters, Flint, Special Agent, Office of Criminal Investigation, State of Wyoming Attorney General, Cheyenne, Wyoming ................................................... 19 

Weeks, Grier, Executive Director, National Association to Protect Children, 

Asheville, North Carolina .................................................................................... 27 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

Responses of Michelle Collins to questions submitted by Senators Biden, 

Sessions and Coburn ............................................................................................ 41 

Responses of Randy Hillman to questions submitted by Senator Coburn .......... 54 

Responses of Robert C. Moses to questions submitted by Senator Coburn ........ 57 

Responses of Flint Waters to questions submitted by Senator Coburn .............. 61 

Responses of Grier Weeks to questions submitted by Senator Coburn .............. 65 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Boxer, Hon. Barbara, a U.S. Senator from the State of California, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 75 

Collins, Michelle, Exploited Child Unit, National Center for Missing and 

Exploited Children, Alexandria, Virginia, statement and attachments .......... 78 

Go Daddy.com, Inc., Warren Adelman, President and Chief Operating Officer, 

Scottsdale, Arizona, letter ................................................................................... 107 

Hillman, Randall I., Executive Director, Alabama District Attorney’s Association, Montgomery, Alabama, statement ............................................................. 108 

International Union of Police Associations, AFL–CIO, Dennis Slocumb, Executive Vice President, Alexandria, Virginia, letter ............................................... 112 

Miami-Dade Police Department, Robert Parker, Director, Miami, Florida, letter .......................................................................................................................... 115 

Moses, Robert C., Lieutenant, High Technology Crimes Unit, Delaware State 

Police, Dover, Delaware, statement .................................................................... 116 

National Association of Police Organizations, Inc., William J. Johnson, Executive Director, Alexandria, Virginia, letter .......................................................... 122 

National Sheriffs’ Association, Craig Webre, President, Alexandria, Virginia, 

letter ...................................................................................................................... 123 

Page

IV 

Scott, McGregor, U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of California, Sacramento, 

California, statement ........................................................................................... 124 

USA Today: 

Limited Funds Hinder Child Porn Fight, article ........................................... 133 

Software Tracks Child Porn Traffickers Online, article ................................ 135 

U.S. Internet Service Provider Association, Christopher G. Bubb, Chairman, 

Washington, D.C., letter ...................................................................................... 138 

Waters, Flint, Special Agent, Office of Criminal Investigation, State of Wyoming Attorney General, Cheyenne, Wyoming, statement ................................ 139 

Weeks, Grier, Executive Director, National Association to Protect Children, 

Asheville, North Carolina, statement ................................................................. 145 

(1) 

CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS FOR PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN FROM VIOLENCE 

AND EXPLOITATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND DRUGS, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, DC 

The Committee met, Pursuant to notice, at 2:07 p.m., in room 

SD–226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., 

presiding. 

Present: Senator Sessions. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

Chairman BIDEN. The hearing will please come to order. 

I apologize to our witnesses for the late start, and probably a 

quick interruption. We are supposed to vote at 2:15. The reason I 

was late, I was trying to find out whether that vote was really 

going to go up at 2:15. I probably wasted more time doing that 

than just coming here. But we’re going to have to at least—we’ll 

probably only get in an opening statement at this point in order to 

go vote and come back. So what I will do, as soon as I make my 

opening statement, assuming the vote goes off, with your permission, Senator, I’ll take off and then you do yours, and we’ll try to 

save a couple minutes that way. 

But I want to thank you all for coming here today. We’re here 

to discuss one of the government’s most solemn obligations—maybe 

the most solemn obligation—government has, and that is to protect 

our children, and particularly protect them from violence and exploitation. 

We’ve taken many important steps here in Congress toward protecting our children and I’m happy to say that my colleague and 

I, and others, have been deeply involved in trying to figure out how 

to make it safer for a long time. 

But events, and technology, in this case, also have moved, in 

many cases, more rapidly than we have been able to move. The 

most important among the protections that we have created is the 

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Unbelievably, 

it was 24 years ago when Senator—God rest his soul—Paul Simon 

and I worked to create the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. 

2 

Our vision was that the center would become a 24-hour resource 

for law enforcement and families and a national hope for information on missing and exploited children. Needless to say, the National Center has exceeded our vision, and the cyber tip line has 

become an indispensable resource for law enforcement. So, I’m anxious to hear—we’re both anxious to hear—from the National Center. 

Just last year we passed the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act, 

which creates a national sex offender registry system so that concerned families and local law enforcement officials know when a 

convicted sex offender moves into their neighborhood or jurisdiction 

and are able to take appropriate actions to protect the children in 

that area. 

Despite these efforts, child pornography and exploitation remains 

a growing and complex problem. According to recent studies, online 

child pornography has increased by 1,500 percent just since 1997. 

There are over 10,000 child pornography web sites worldwide, and 

child pornography has become a $3 billion industry. 

We are not talking about morphed images of adults posing as 

under-aged teens, we are talking about sadistic, violent movies depicting actual abuse. I say to my friend, I had an opportunity 

which I almost wish I didn’t have, to witness some of this in my 

office just a little while ago, as one of our witnesses brought in material to show me just what’s going on. I don’t know about my colleague—as a former Federal prosecutor he’s prosecuted many 

cases—but lots of times we talk about these concerns and I’ve 

never seen them. 

I could not watch, quite frankly, the one depiction, which if you 

go on the Internet, you’ll see in a minute, on a computer, someone 

under 8 years old. I just watched the very beginning of it, before 

the abuse started and I couldn’t watch it. Then I said, well, give 

me a contrast. Show me someone who is a teenager that’s 14 or 15 

years old. That was, in a sense, standard pornography and you 

couldn’t tell whether this young woman was 14 or 16 or 18 or 20— 

at least I couldn’t—but the range of the pornography that’s on 

these web sites is astounding to me, and how easily it is to be 

accessed. 

I am revealing an ignorance here. I’m revealing what I think I 

know, like you Jeff, an awful lot about violent crime in America, 

but this is an area that I didn’t realize how incredibly easily accessible it is with so many, many, many, many different sites. Again, 

I want to make it clear. We’re not talking about morphed images 

or adults posing as under-aged teens. 

According to the 2006 study by the National Center for Missing 

and Exploited Children, 83 percent of arrested child pornography 

possessors had images of children between the ages of 6 and 12; 

39 percent of the possessors had images of children between 3 and 

5. And I’m not just talking about an image of a naked child, 3 to 

5, in a provocative position. I’m talking about sex acts being performed on a child 3 to 5 years old. Not all of those were that. But 

19 percent of the possessors had images of infants and toddlers 

under the age of 3, and 21 percent depicted violence such as bondage, rape, or torture. 

3 

The problem continues to grow. Last week, the National Center 

for Missing and Exploited Children handled its 580,000th—over 

half a million, 580,000th—reported child exploitation. The Peer 

Precision Program that Special Agent Waters will demonstrate 

later has identified over 600,000 individual computers in America, 

600,000 computer serial numbers connected to trafficking of child 

pornography over a peer-to-peer witness, which all of our witnesses 

understand what that means, but I’m not sure the vast majority of 

Americans understand what that means and how easily accessible 

this is. 

Ladies and gentlemen, the bottom line is, we’re not making much 

of a dent in this problem. Due to lack of resources, we are investigating less than 2 percent of the known cases of child pornography trafficking. Again, we are only investigating 2 percent of the 

known child pornography traffickers. 

Now, in fairness, because I bored down on this a little bit earlier 

in my office, that 2 percent is of the 600,000, and some of those 

folks in the 600,000 exchanged these files one time. It may have 

been accidental. You don’t know whether it was real. As you narrow this down—and there are ways that I’m going to be asking all 

the witnesses how we do it to figure out who the really bad guys 

are—it gets to be considerably less than that. 

I asked in the office for them to show me the number of people 

who have engaged in trading files in a 30-day period of over 100 

times, and I think the number was 1,500 or something. So the 

thing I don’t want people walking away from here today, is that 

this is such an immense problem, it’s not manageable, such an immense problem we can’t get our arms around it. We can get our 

arms around the worst aspect of this if we provide the resources 

for it. 

Due to lack of resources, though, we’ve not been making the 

progress that we should. What makes this even more inexcusable 

is that when we do investigate these cases we have at least a 30 

percent chance of rescuing a child from ongoing abuse. That’s the 

statistic. I’m going to ask that that statistic be justified today, but 

that’s the statistic that is pretty widely accepted in the community. 

Some studies show that there is likely even a greater chance of 

finding a local victim. In other words, when they go in and investigate, get a warrant, roughly 30-plus percent of the time you may 

very well find a kid that you can identify and physically rescue 

from that local issuing of that warrant and going in and doing a 

search. 

For example, a study of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children found that 40 percent of child pornography possessors were dual offenders who sexually victimize children and possessed child pornography. Speaking for myself, they’re the people 

we really want to nail. 

The study at the Department of Justice on Federal prisoners 

found that 85 percent of child pornography possessors had committed acts of sexual abuse against minors, including everything 

from inappropriate touching to rape. As you’ll hear from Special 

Agent Waters, the Wyoming Attorney General’s Office has found 

that, based on the investigations that he’s conducted there, a local 

4 

victim in at least one-third of each of the cases they pursue is 

found. 

Don’t get me wrong. The witnesses that we are going to hear 

from today and the thousands of Federal, State, and local investigators and prosecutors are out there working tirelessly to combat 

this problem. This is in no way to implicate the lack of resolve on 

the part of Federal or State law enforcement officers. But part of 

this is a learning curve. Part of this is, things are changing rapidly. 

Part of this is a lack of resources. So in my view, we’ve not dedicated enough Federal agents to this problem and we’ve not provided enough support for local law enforcement agencies in order 

for them to better be able to do their job. 

In addition to restoring cuts to the COPS program and the Byrne 

Assistance Grants, we should pass the Combatting Child Exploitation Act, which authorizes $1.05 billion over the next 8 years to 

help combat this growing problem. 

Under this bill we will triple funding for local Internet Crime 

Against Children Task Forces, to provide more resources to the 

FBI, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, and regional computer forensic labs. 

Before I close, I’d like to show you how pervasive this problem 

has become. I asked Mr. Waters to run a quick check of all the 

computers that are currently, as we speak, trafficking in child pornography, which has been scrolling on the screen during my remarks. Now, Mr. Waters, if you would show us the interactive map 

showing the illegal activity over the last 24 hours. 

[Whereupon, the map was shown.] 

Chairman BIDEN. Each one of those red dots—correct me if I’m 

wrong, Mr. Waters—indicates a computer in the United States of 

America that in fact is located in the jurisdiction you see, that in 

the last 24 hours has engaged in the illegal activity of transferring 

over the Internet, from one computer to another, child pornography. As you can see, it is a pervasive problem. It’s right out in 

the open for any trained officer to see. With enough resources, we 

could take action on a lot of that. 

Now, again, before I turn this over to Senator Sessions, the one 

thing I always worry about, having dealt with, as my colleague has, 

criminal justice issues for my entire career as a Senator, is that we 

do not want to over-promise and we do not want to in any way exaggerate the problem, and we don’t want to be in a position where 

what we’re laying out there appears to be beyond the capacity of 

anybody to deal with. 

This does not mean that there’s that many child abusers out 

there, but it does mean it’s a very fertile pond to fish in order to 

find the people we most are concerned about, and that is the people 

who are exploiting these children in the most violent and vicious 

and ugly ways so that we can put them behind bars, we can get 

them out of the system. 

I now turn over the podium to my colleague, Senator Sessions, 

who has done an incredible amount of work in this area. 

5 

STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF ALABAMA 

Senator SESSIONS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for calling the hearing and for your excellent summary of the situation we 

find ourselves in today. 

We are really dealing with modern challenges to child sexual exploitation and abuse. I am distressed by the dramatic growth of the 

criminal networks that traffic in child pornography over the Internet. I am also concerned by statistics, as you’ve noted, that suggest 

that Federal, State, and local law enforcement is overwhelmed by 

this rise in exploitation. There is no doubt that the Federal Government has an important role to play in combatting child exploitation, which often involves interstate crimes, but many cases are 

fundamentally State crimes and should remain so. 

Although the scope of the problem and the havoc it wreaks in the 

lives of abused children and their parents is extremely distressing, 

I am encouraged by the fact that in the past we have addressed 

this crime successfully, and we can do so again. 

I was a Federal prosecutor when President Reagan undertook an 

aggressive effort on child pornography cases. It was one of the most 

successful initiatives ever. It was greatly enhanced by the Supreme 

Court’s ruling at the time in New York v. Ferber, that held that 

possession of child pornography is effectively a crime, per se, which 

removed the prosecutor’s burden of establishing community standards and other complexities of pornography cases. 

So possession cases were, therefore, much easier to prosecute. 

The Federal Government had only to show that the defendant 

knowingly possessed a sexually explicit image of a minor that had 

been shipped in interstate commerce. This was before the real explosion of the Internet. Modern distribution networks over the 

Internet present law enforcement with serious challenges, as one 

pedophile trades in child abuse photographs with another 

pedophile, all under the cover of sometimes computer firewalls, 

sometimes sent through the mail once they communicate with one 

another and identify one another. They shift addresses repeatedly. 

I would note that when we started, really Congress passed the 

law, the child pornography law, and I’m sure you were probably 

part of passing it. But what happened was, we eliminated child 

pornography from almost any bookstore. You could go in bookstores 

in America, in newsstands, and find this kind of material. After the 

law passed, child pornography disappeared. There were no more 

cases to make. But it went underground, I think, is the situation. 

So I am pleased to have Randy Hillman, the executive director 

of the Alabama District Attorney’s Association here today to tell us 

what role his high-tech operation, the National Computer Forensic 

Center in Hoover, Alabama, might play in this critical effort, because it is an Internet-driven problem today. 

I commend Mr. Hillman for his dedication to improving the technological skills of State and local law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and judges, and I look forward to hearing his testimony. I am 

also encouraged by technological advances in the investigative techniques used in some child pornography cases. These techniques 

allow law enforcement officers to target arrests on the most serious 

distributors of child pornography. This is an enormous developVerDate Aug 31 2005 11:43 Nov 21, 2008 Jkt 044986 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\44986.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
6 

ment. I would note, it was a State official that developed this technology, Wyoming Special Agent Flint Waters, as you’ve indicated, 

Mr. Chairman. It further highlights the frontline role that State 

and local law enforcement must play in this effort. 

I prosecuted a number of child pornography cases when I was a 

U.S. Attorney, and in virtually every one—more than the one-third, 

Senator—in virtually every case the defendant had a history of actually molesting children. In fact, I remember one of the cases. 

After a period of years, there appeared to be no evidence of that, 

I was told. I said, why don’t you inquire a little further. I’m just 

curious. So we discovered that a sister, 25 years before, had admitted that the defendant had abused her, a younger sister. Recent 

statistics suggest that about one-third of these cases involve abuse 

of children, but I think it’s bigger than that, really. 

Important work has been done on the issue and I am proud to 

have served on the Adam Walsh Conference Committee and to be 

present at the White House when that important piece of legislation was signed into law. That Act imposed tough penalties for the 

most serious crimes against children, such as sex trafficking of children and child prostitution. The Act also made it harder for sexual 

predators to reach children on the Internet by authorizing the regional Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces, which provide funding and training to State and local law enforcement officers who combat illegal exploitation crimes on the Internet. 

So, in conclusion, I believe, Mr. Chairman, that you are correct. 

We are facing a very real problem, that it is damaging the lives of 

young children far more than we like to admit. As we will hear 

today, I think we can all agree we need to give it a higher priority 

in our law enforcement initiative. 

Thank you. 

Chairman BIDEN. Thank you very much, Senator. 

We have about 4 minutes left in which to make this vote, to go 

over and vote, which means we will be put in a recess in a moment 

for about 10 to 12 minutes, is how long before we get back. But let 

me just announce the order in which we’ll proceed. 

Our first panel will be U.S. Attorney McGregor ‘‘Greg’’ Scott of 

the Eastern District of California. The second panel will be Special 

Agent Flint Waters of the Wyoming Attorney General’s Office; 

Lieutenant Bob Moses, the High Technology Crimes Unit of the 

Delaware State Police; Randy Hillman, who’s been mentioned earlier, of the Alabama District Attorney’s Association; Michelle Collins, who is from the National Center for Missing and Exploited 

Children; and Grier Weeks, the National Association to Protect 

Children. They will be on one panel as well. So we have two panels 

here. First, when we come back, we’ll swear in the U.S. Attorney 

from the Eastern District of California. 

We’re going to recess from somewhere between 8 to 12 minutes, 

as long as it takes to get there to vote and get back. 

[Whereupon, at 2:28 p.m. the hearing was recessed.] 

AFTER RECESS [2:47 p.m.] 

Chairman BIDEN. The hearing will resume. 

We appreciate the indulgence of the witnesses. 

Our first witness, as I indicated, is the U.S. Attorney from the 

Eastern District of California. He’s served in the post since 1993. 

7 

He’s a graduate of Santa Clara University—my grandfather’s university—in California and the Hastings College of Law. 

Prior to his appointment as U.S. Attorney, he served as the District Attorney for Shasta County, California. Mr. Scott is a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army Reserve, with 22 years service as an infantry officer. He commanded an infantry company on 

the streets of Los Angeles during the riots of 1992, and he’s a graduate of the Command and General Staff College. 

Mr. Scott, welcome. We appreciate your making the effort to be 

here. The floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF MCGREGOR SCOTT, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO, 

CALIFORNIA 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you very much, Chairman Biden and Ranking 

Member Sessions. I want to thank you for this opportunity to 

present the perspective of the Department of Justice on this most 

vital issue, the protection of our children. I want to thank you for 

convening this hearing today to bring light to this very, very significant issue. 

The Internet is one of the great advances of our age, an unprecedented source of information and ideas. But the Internet can also 

be a dark and sinister place, as those who mean our children ill 

use the anonymity it provides to advance their horrific objectives. 

Let there be no doubt that these are not, to use the common 

phrase, ‘‘just pictures’’, as the Senator eloquently set out in his 

opening statement. Each photograph or video literally represents 

the sexual assault of a child and nothing less. The evidence grows 

every day of something we in law enforcement have known intuitively for a long time: the odds are overwhelming that a person 

who deals in child pornography is also a child molester. 

It is not my intent to speak of uncomfortable things, but we need 

to be clear on what exactly it is that we’re talking about here 

today. Let me reference a few cases from my own district to make 

this point. We prosecuted a main who live-streamed onto the Internet for viewing by others a video of himself masturbating over, and 

ejaculating onto, his 6-month-old daughter. 

We prosecuted a psychiatrist from Saudi Arabia who communicated via the Internet with what he thought was the mother of 

a two-and-a-half-year-old girl. He traveled to this country for the 

purpose of having sexual relations with that little girl, but instead 

found police waiting for him because that mother was instead an 

undercover officer. 

We prosecuted a fourth grade teacher who regularly had his 

daughter’s friends over for sleepovers. He would drug the girls, molest them, and record the events, which he kept on his home computer. 

Faced with this onslaught of crimes against our children, the 

question becomes: what are we doing about it? In May of 2006, the 

Department of Justice launched Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide effort to marshall all our resources—Federal, State, local, and 

private sector—to protect our children. 

A great strength of Project Safe Childhood is that a broad strategic vision has been set at the department level, with each U.S. 

8 

Attorney tasked to develop an operational plan, in consultation 

with all our partners, as to what works best in his or her district. 

Let me be clear: our partnerships with State and local law enforcement in general, and the Internet Crimes Against Children 

Task Forces in particular, are the engines which drive these operational plans. 

Under Project Safe Childhood, we have two primary tasks: to 

prosecute and to educate. We are doing very well in both these 

areas. In the first full year of Project Safe Childhood, Federal prosecutions increased by 28 percent. In addition, U.S. Attorneys have 

sponsored scores of town hall meetings and school forums, and the 

department has sponsored public safety announcements all designed to arm parents and children with the tools they need to 

guard against online predators. The bottom line is that Project Safe 

Childhood provides a centralized strategic aim and a decentralized 

operational component for the department and all of our allies on 

this issue. 

The Department of Justice fully welcomes an embraces the work 

of our many partners. As a former county District Attorney, it is 

my firm view that State and local law enforcement are absolutely 

crucial partners for us. That is why the department funds the 

Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces across the Nation. 

In the past 5 years, the number of ICACs has been very nearly tripled, from 20 to 59. In fiscal year 2007, the department increased 

the funding for ICACs from nearly $15 million to $25 million. 

Today, more than 1,800 local law enforcement agencies are members of, or affiliated with, ICACs. 

The Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section 

is also critical, providing prosecution and computer forensics assistance to the field. CEOS, as it is known, provides technical assistance, legislative input, and prosecutorial aid on issues and cases involving child exploitation and they are an integral part of what we 

do. 

Computer forensics and the capacity to deal with all of these 

cases is also a very crucial issue. Nearly 2 years ago, the Deputy 

Attorney General formed a Computer Forensics Backlog Working 

Group within the department, and I served as the U.S. Attorney’s 

representative on that group. That group has worked long and 

hard with the FBI to find better ways to deal with the exploding 

caseload generated by Project Safe Childhood. Earlier this year in 

February, the Deputy Attorney General announced a series of steps 

the FBI will undertake to increase its computer forensics capabilities for child exploitation cases. 

In summary, the Department of Justice understands and fully 

appreciates the significance of this issue. We now have in place a 

strategic plan at the department level, with operational plans in 

each district. We commend our allies for what they do and embrace 

them as full partners in this fight. We are grateful for the opportunity to work with you and your staff on this issue. I thank you 

for this time and I’d be happy to answer any questions that you 

may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Scott appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

9 

Chairman BIDEN. Well, again, thank you for being here and 

thank you for the good work that you have done. 

You referenced Project Safe Childhood. 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes, sir. 

Chairman BIDEN. I don’t dispute for a moment the fact that prosecutions have increased over recent years, and I applaud the department for that effort, especially as I still think you are shorthanded. The Attorney General keeps telling me you don’t need a 

lot more people, but I think you do. But that’s an ongoing little battle we have. 

What I’ve been a little more concerned about is the notion of 

what is the overall strategy for child exploitation prevention across 

the administration, so I’d like to ask you a couple of questions. If 

this goes beyond your brief, then I understand, and just let me 

know, OK? 

Mr. SCOTT. I appreciate that, Senator. Thank you. 

Chairman BIDEN. Has there been any distribution of resources 

made available by the Congress to the Justice Department for hires 

of U.S. Attorneys because of the increased workload in various jurisdictions, including your own? 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes. In fact, in this present budget year there are 45 

new Assistant U.S. Attorney positions, which are full-time employee positions, which will be allocated in the U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and that process is fully engaged right now. It’s essentially 

a competitive process, where each district submits a proposal as to 

why that district should receive a position. In addition to that, 

there were approximately 30 positions, I believe, in last year’s 

budget, and perhaps the year before that, likewise, that were 

divvied out to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. So, approximately 75 over 

the last two to 3 years have been allocated to the U.S. Attorney’s 

Offices. 

Chairman BIDEN. Got you. 

Now, can you tell me a little more about—Senator Sessions and 

I, like you, have been doing this a long time. 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes, sir. 

Chairman BIDEN. Senator Sessions—I have a longer history, he 

has a broader experience. 

Senator SESSIONS. I had to work hard using the laws you passed. 

Chairman BIDEN. That is right. 

Senator SESSIONS. As a matter of fact, when I was a U.S. Attorney, this Senate passed some great laws that really enhanced law 

enforcement. I’m glad that you have continued to show that interest. 

Chairman BIDEN. I am not being—and the Senator is not implying this—either solicitous or in any way trying to exaggerate the 

involvement, but let me just talk to you like the three of us were 

in a room together, because we know the area relatively well from 

slightly different perspectives, but pretty broadly. 

One of the things that happens when you’re talking about allocation of resources, intra- and interjurisdictional, is there is competition. We get these great ideas up here about how we’re going to 

pass a piece of legislation, setting up task forces, and we’re going 

to have State, local, Federal officials working together—and by the 

way, some of them work incredibly well. But could you talk to us 

10 

a little bit more about how many additional resources, departmentwide, have been allocated for activities under the Project Safe 

Childhood? In other words, how do you allocate those moneys? Talk 

to us about what you focus on and who you cooperate with in the 

focus. 

So in a way—excuse me for saying this—that your mom and my 

mom—I’m sure your mom is as well, my mom is a very intelligent 

woman and very well-informed—so that the average person, our 

moms, could understand what we’re talking about. Not in Senatespeak or in Justice Department-speak. I mean, talk to us about 

how you spend the money. 

Mr. SCOTT. And just so I can be clear, Senator, that is in terms 

of my own district, how we leverage the resources that we have? 

Chairman BIDEN. Yes. Or if you know, speaking for the department, how the department is allocating these resources. Maybe 

that is not your—although you’re representing the department, 

that may be beyond your brief, and I would ask for the department, 

in writing, to tell me, of all the Project Safe Childhood dollars, how 

have they allocated them? That tells us what the priorities are, 

what you think the best investment of the dollar is in terms of 

dealing with making children safer. But maybe you can talk to me 

about your district. 

Mr. SCOTT. Well, I’ll try to touch on— 

Chairman BIDEN. Either way. 

Mr. SCOTT. I can speak in very general terms about the department. I cannot give you line-for-line dollar amounts, but I can tell 

you sort of general subjects. 

Chairman BIDEN. Right. 

Mr. SCOTT. The FBI clearly has a cyber division and has some 

focused resources on this. They have a stand-alone unit right outside of the District here in Northern Virginia that works on these 

issues, so that’s part of it. Another part is, within the department, 

the grant program, through OJJDP, allocates money to State and 

locals. Within the department, the department ponied up, I think, 

in excess of $11 million out of its own pocket last year for more 

money to create 13 additional ICAC task forces around the Nation, 

to include a second one in my district in Fresno. We already had 

one in Sacramento. 

So in addition to that, I know that the Deputy Attorney General’s Office has staff folks who are working from sort of an overview perspective on this thing. So that’s the department. I can tell 

you that Immigration & Customs Enforcement also works on this 

issue. The Postal Service also works on this issue. 

So how we make it work back in Sacramento, California, we have 

co-located under one roof the FBI cyber division, the ICAC that we 

have, and then there’s a third entity, which is a State-funded hightech task force which also works on these cases. So we’ve got all 

those folks under one roof working collaboratively together. 

And then we have within my office a dedicated Project Safe 

Childhood coordinator, but a number of other Assistant U.S. Attorneys who also handle a certain number of those cases each year. 

That, in a general sense, is how we’re allocated in terms of going 

after this thing. 

Chairman BIDEN. I yield to my colleague. 

11 

Senator SESSIONS. Just a few quick questions, if you know the 

answer to this. We’re seeing a lot more indications of child abuse 

and child pornography on the Internet. Do you think that’s because 

we’re more adept at identifying it and they’re using the Internet 

more, or do you think for some reason there’s more abuse and more 

abusers out there, and is there any science to back that up? 

Mr. SCOTT. I’m going to rely on what I see rather than any scientific studies that I’ve read in trying to answer that question, Senator. I think common sense tells me that, with the proliferation of 

child pornography that’s taken place over the last 10 or 15 years, 

those who view this stuff have sort of grown and they’ve reached 

the level of where it’s not enough. This picture, while last year it 

was enough for them to reach satisfaction, this year it’s not, so it’s 

got to be something even more egregious to create the instincts and 

desires that are generated by child pornography. 

I think that’s a big part of the problem, is that it’s so widespread 

now within these particular areas and among these particular 

groups of people that there’s a constant demand for more and a 

constant demand for more egregious pictures and videos. I think 

that’s the problem. 

Senator SESSIONS. To carry through, that would indicate that the 

more people have access to more and more violent and exacerbated 

cases of child abuse on the Internet the more likely they are to 

abuse children themselves. Is there any study on that, to your 

knowledge? I know there’s a connection. I’ve seen the connection. 

I know that the average person is not interested in seeing child 

pornography. It’s a certain mental problem that causes people to be 

attracted to that. Do you know the answer to that, if you know? 

Maybe some of our other panelists would. 

Mr. SCOTT. I’ll approach that from two perspectives. One is the 

study that Senator Biden referenced, which was done by the Board 

of Prisons, by Dr. Hernandez down at Buttner, which determined 

that something like 85 or 87 percent of those incarcerated for pornography possession only—in other words, no physical crime, just 

possession of child pornography—admitted having molested children, and on average the number was— 

Senator SESSIONS. We’ve been using the number of one-third, 

and that is 85 percent, which is more consistent with my personal 

experience, which was anecdotal, I’ll admit. 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes. So beyond that study, what I would reference is 

looking at the cases that we are handling, that we are processing 

that we see. I’m hesitant to put a percentage number to it, but it’s 

an overwhelming percentage of those cases that involve some kind 

molestation. And a very typical case for us to prosecute is one that 

starts out as a sexual assault or child molestation investigation by 

a sheriff’s department or a D.A.’s office, and they’ll do a search 

warrant and search the suspect’s home computer, and guess what? 

There’s child pornography on the home computer. That is a common pattern that we see on a regular basis. 

Senator SESSIONS. Now, you discussed, in response to Senator 

Biden’s questions about the difficulties of the entities involved in 

task forces. I agree with Senator Biden that they can be fabulously 

effective. When you co-locate, where they are all together at one 

12 

time, they can just bring to bear all kinds of capabilities that would 

not exist otherwise and be highly successful. 

Though we want as much involvement from local police as we 

can, explain to us why a local policeman, through jurisdictional and 

State lines, has difficulties prosecuting effectively, many times, 

these kind of cases. 

Mr. SCOTT. That’s a great question. It’s due to the very nature 

of the Internet itself. We may have one suspect in Fresno, we may 

have another in Reading. There may be one in Montgomery. I 

mean, literally, because of the Internet there are no limitations on 

jurisdictional issues because you push a button and that image can 

go anywhere in the world in an instant. So what we are able to 

bring, it’s really— 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, first of all, the police officer in Sacramento can’t issue a subpoena for a computer in Montgomery, 

Alabama. 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes. So that’s why I think these task forces are so 

highly effective, is that you’ve got the manpower and the commitment and the horsepower from the locals, combined with the Federal jurisdictional resources, to get a search warrant to go look at 

several computers across the country simultaneously under the 

Federal authority, and then to have the Federal prosecutorial aspect as well where we can prosecute people from all over the country—all over the world, for that matter—if we have venue in our 

district, which, with the Internet, is not a very difficult thing to 

come up with these days. 

Senator SESSIONS. And when you have a local prosecutor in California, a State prosecutor, they have difficulty issuing subpoenas to 

people in Montgomery or other places, but the Federal Government 

can do that quite readily. So, there is an important role for the 

Federal Government in these cases. 

Thank you. 

Chairman BIDEN. With your permission, I’d like to pursue two 

other points off of what the Senator said. One of the things that 

I’ve been thinking of, as one of the authors of this legislation where 

we’re trying to increase the money available, is that I had met with 

one of the State Attorneys General who told me about Mr. Waters 

out in Wyoming. 

His unit out there has developed—which we’re going to hear a 

little bit about—the software to be able to identify by, literally, the 

click of a mouse—I watched it—all the transactions taking place 

where they are trading pornographic files, children’s pornographic 

files. 

I asked him, for example, to click up Delaware, asked him to 

click up Pennsylvania, asked him to click up—I forget where else. 

In Pennsylvania, just in the last 30 days, there is one person. I 

guess I’m not supposed to say where. We don’t know exactly where 

this person lives, but we know the town he lives in, the zip code, 

if you will. You can go—as you know better than I do—with an 

identification, to Comcast, if it’s Comcast, and you can get the 

name and address of that person. It lists all the files that he has 

transferred. I think the number was 2,700 in the last 30 days. 

I asked him to go to Delaware and list every bit of trading on 

this particular Internet site that took place in the State of DelaVerDate Aug 31 2005 11:43 Nov 21, 2008 Jkt 044986 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\44986.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
13 

ware. There were 40 individuals, 40 computers that traded material. The most frequently traded was, I think, 48 times in 30 days. 

There are roughly 40 who have done it 10 or more times. 

I asked what the experience has been in Wyoming, and the studies that I have read and my staff has made available to me, and 

there seems to be the ability, without being able to scientifically 

prove it, that just through simple common sense if you identify 

someone who is trading large numbers of these files, you can read 

the title of the files. I actually viewed parts of several of them. It 

is pretty easy to pick out the person engaged in either transmitting 

or downloading violent scenes of rape and molestation of people 

under the age of 8 years of age. A lot of this material, the title will 

tell you. It’s basically: watch the rape of an 8-year-old. I’m being 

a little—but we’re going to show some of this, I think. We may or 

may not. I don’t know whether it violates anybody’s rights. I guess 

you’ll tell me when we do it. 

So it seems to me there ought to be a protocol that can be done 

at a Federal level or at a local level that would really enhance the 

training tools available to local law enforcement officers who would 

be able to identify and narrow down, just by looking at what was 

traded, what was transmitted, and you’ll be able to get a pretty 

good picture of the person who you want to get the warrant for. 

Once you get a warrant, even before you execute the warrant, 

you’re able to immediately—now you have the name of an individual off that ID number and you’re able to, from that, quickly 

check whether they have a criminal record, quickly check whether 

they’re employed working with children, quickly determine whether 

or not they have been convicted of child molestation and the like. 

It seems to me, you could, through an office like yours or a State 

Attorney General’s Office essentially assign one person to train to 

just go through the files and identify the highest value targets, because I know the ability to go out and look at 600,000 computers 

is just not within the realm. 

I mean, just to put this in perspective, I asked the FBI—one of 

the reasons I asked you about the allocation of resources—and they 

responded to me on July 11 of—that can’t be right. It must be 

2007. It says 2008. We haven’t hit July 11, 2008. The FBI indicated 

they had 32 agents dedicated to innocent images, meaning what 

we’re talking about, a unit that specializes in this area, and a total 

of 260 agents that have worked these cases. 

Now, by contrast, white collar crime, they have 2,342 agents 

working white collar crime cases; health care fraud, 430; organized 

crime—I’m not making a value judgment here, but it’s just to put 

it in perspective—720 agents; gang-related crimes, 435 agents; and 

260 for this area. 

So one of the problems I think we have are resources, the available resources that the FBI has available to them, and in turn you 

have available to you, knowing you’re not FBI. 

At the same time, they estimated that there were at least 25,000 

suspects that they knew of who had engaged in commercial child 

pornography trafficking in the last 5 years. So the point I’m trying 

to make is—which you already know—the universe is large, the 

number of people, notwithstanding the fact we do a good job, allocated at a Federal level to that large universe is relatively small. 

14 

So in addition to us—I realize this is more of a statement, but 

it ends in a question, believe it or not—providing Federal resources, and in turn local resources through task forces, I was 

thinking maybe—and this is a question I’m going to ask, and I’m 

going to ask my friend later if maybe he’d consider joining me— 

I think we should be also talking about something equivalent to 

the COPS bill or the local prosecutors’ legislation we’ve done where 

States can apply directly for resources to deal with what is able to 

be done. 

In the jurisdiction of Delaware, for example, the Attorney General can identify—because we have no State prosecutor, we have no 

local prosecutors-–40 cases, 40 individuals, you can see what 

they’ve traded in, all illegal, on the Internet, that where they’ve 

traded in a 30-day period more than 20 times, putting them in a 

category that is fairly highly suspect, and then decide within that 

category, you don’t need a warrant in Alabama. I’m told that, as 

I mentioned in my statement, a significant number of victims are 

found in the local—the local—execution of these warrants. 

So what I’m trying to get at is this. Would you view it as a help 

or a hindrance as a Federal prosecutor if, in fact, the local D.A. in 

your jurisdiction—I guess it’s a D.A. in California—had additional 

resources in his or her account, meaning personnel and training, to 

be able to go after those individuals that are high-value targets 

that are located within their city limits, their town limits, et 

cetera? Do you understand what I’m trying to drive at here? What 

would help you the most? 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes. I think, first of all, Mr. Waters is to be commended for the program. It is something that all the ICACs in the 

country are using. It’s a terrific resource and we’re going to make 

sure we maintain that as it transfers to the RISK program. 

But to directly answer the question with respect to the local prosecutors, I think the question that has to be asked about that is, 

what is the local State law with respect to these crimes? By way 

of example in California, until very recently it was a misdemeanor. 

We couldn’t get a felony. That’s now been changed by State-wide 

proposition because nothing could be advanced through the State 

legislature. 

But it really depends on what that local State law is, because as 

a result of that California law, we became the only game in town 

in terms of pursuing a felony and imprisonment for the most egregious of offenders. So I believe in Delaware it’s a misdemeanor as 

well, from what I read last night somewhere. But that is the fundamental problem there, is you don’t want to load up a local D.A.’s 

office if they don’t have the tools to effectively go after the real 

egregious offenders. 

Thank you. I have no further questions. 

Senator SESSIONS. So you have now another 45 AUSAs totaling 

75, which is almost one full-time position per U.S. Attorney Office. 

Frankly, would you not say, in those 32 FTEs, full-time equivalent, 

working on these cases, it seems to me the balance needs to be, the 

shift needs to be toward the FBI and the investigators, unless 

you’re using an awful lot of State and local investigators because 

really you should have more investigators than prosecutors on most 

types of cases. 

15 

How would you evaluate the balance between Federal investigators and Federal prosecutors? 

Mr. SCOTT. Well, I think quite honestly, in my experience the 

FBI does not have enough investigators dedicated to this particular 

area. And I’ll be very candid with you, this is an issue that we’ve 

raised with the FBI on a regular basis in the context of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee and elsewhere. As a result of 

that shortage of FBI agents, we are essentially completely dependent on State and local law enforcement to do the investigative 

legwork for us on these cases. In my own district, ICE has been 

terrific. I don’t mean to be critical of the FBI in my own district 

because they’re working hard and they’re bringing good cases. 

Senator SESSIONS. What kind of jurisdiction does ICE have? 

Mr. SCOTT. Essentially the same as the FBI in this particular 

area. 

Senator SESSIONS. That includes Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms 

and Customs? 

Mr. SCOTT. Immigration & Customs Enforcement. 

Senator SESSIONS. Right. 

Mr. SCOTT. So the ability to get search warrants, grand jury subpoenas, conduct search warrants across State lines or district lines 

rests with ICE as well. But you make an excellent point, Senator, 

which is that in all my years as a prosecutor, the number of investigators is supposed to outnumber the number of prosecutors. 

That’s kind of a general formula, because you’re always going to 

have more investigations going than you’re going to have prosecutions at any given moment in time. There is a disparity in terms 

of the FBI resources that are allocated to this directly and the 

number of AUSAs and local prosecutors who are working on it. 

Which again brings me back to my fundamental point, which is 

that we love the locals when it comes to these kinds of investigations. 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, really it is the locals that are working 

on protecting individual children in their communities. With regard 

to that, on a fundamental Federal, State law and the Constitution 

as you understand it, isn’t it true that if there is a local production, 

if there’s a local child abuse, there may not even be a Federal crime 

chargeable? 

Mr. SCOTT. Well, that’s exactly right, unless it’s a military installation or an Indian reservation. There is no original Federal criminal jurisdiction for child molestation cases. At least in my State, 

the original jurisdiction rests with the local District Attorney’s Office for physical acts of molestation of children. 

Senator SESSIONS. So a lot of people don’t realize, if someone 

shoots somebody in Sacramento, or let’s say, to be safe, picks up 

a local rock and kills them, that’s not a Federal crime and cannot 

be prosecuted in Federal court unless it’s related to civil rights or 

some Federal connection. 

Mr. SCOTT. In the absence of Federal land. If it’s on a prison 

ground or— 

Senator SESSIONS. I guess what I’m saying is, you need the local 

people. These task forces, to me, are the way to coordinate. Is there 

any kind of registry—Senator Biden, I think you touched on it— 

where, within every police department in America, people can be 

16 

designated officers with expertise in this area, so if you had a lead 

in California that ran to Tennessee in Knoxville, you could check 

the registry, and here’s an experienced investigator who is committed to these kinds of things in Knoxville, Tennessee. Is that 

something that’s in place now? If not, do we need it? 

Mr. SCOTT. No. That is, again, one of the beauties of the ICACs, 

is that they all talk to each other. So an officer who works in my 

ICAC in Sacramento, if they discover a lead in Knoxville, Tennessee— 

Senator SESSIONS. What percentage of—ICAC is what? What is 

that? 

Mr. SCOTT. Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. 

Senator SESSIONS. But they may not have one in Knoxville. 

Mr. SCOTT. We have pretty much covered the country at this 

point. 

Senator SESSIONS. Oh, really? 

Mr. SCOTT. We’ve got 59 up and running. Every State has at 

least one. It’s something that we’re going to look to continue to 

grow. This really, as I said in my statement, is the engine that is 

driving the train on these investigations. So you have that at least 

indirect communication link between the ICACs. Above and beyond 

that, we’ve got the Federal component too, so you may have an FBI 

agent in Sacramento who can call to an FBI agent in Knoxville and 

say, we’ve got this lead. 

Senator SESSIONS. But I’ve found they’re not always so interested. 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes, sir. 

Senator SESSIONS. Would you admit that based on your experience? 

Mr. SCOTT. Well, I have to say— 

Senator SESSIONS. An FBI agent has got his own child case 

there, and now somebody wants him to drop what he’s doing and 

do something else and take up this case. It’s not, oftentimes, as intensely important to him as to the person who asked him to do it. 

Mr. SCOTT. Well, I think that’s a product of human nature. We 

like to deal with what’s right in front of us as opposed to what 

maybe someone is calling us about. 

Senator SESSIONS. Let me quickly ask you this. You talk about, 

the ICAC task forces have trained over 10,000 officers in 2005, 

15,000 in 2006, and 20,000 law enforcement officers in 2007 that 

were trained. 

I’d like to understand a little about, what kind of training is this? 

Is this a one-day conference, a week-long conference? Is it hands 

on with computers and technology or is it briefing on the basic 

overall law, and so forth? 

Mr. SCOTT. Training can really span the spectrum of all the 

things you just described. There are one-day trainings, there are 

multiple day trainings. Much of it is focused on the concept of 

learning how to build and bring a case for Federal prosecution, because we’ve got a deputy sheriff who hasn’t necessarily ever done 

that before, how we go about procuring Federal search warrants, 

grand jury subpoenas. So, a familiarization process with the Federal prosecution component is part of it. 

17 

Mr. Waters, I’m sure, will be able to answer that question in 

much greater detail than I can right now, representing the ICACs, 

but it really does cover the spectrum of how we bring these cases. 

There’s no one-size-fits-all in terms of the potential things that 

you’ve sent out. 

Senator SESSIONS. I would just say that if you’re going to empower and really get the full benefit of State and local law enforcement, you would agree that training is very valuable, would you 

not? And No. 2, would you agree that it is a very appropriate Federal role? In other words, rather than trying to put Federal agents 

all over the country and prosecuting these cases directly and investigating them directly, if we can empower the local people to do 

that as part of their duties, that’s more consistent with our Federal 

framework than the other way around. 

Mr. SCOTT. I agree wholeheartedly with that observation. Just by 

way of example, on May 1 in Sacramento, May 2 in Fresno, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children is providing 

training for our local law enforcement officers on this exact issue. 

Mr. Craig Hill is coming out. We’re going to have approximately 

100 agents in each location, and it really is an example, again, of 

the complete partnership of Project Safe Childhood, where we’re 

doing this under that umbrella and utilizing the resources that are 

given to us by the National Center. 

Senator SESSIONS. And of course, sometimes, like Mr. Hillman or 

Mr. Waters, they can train Federal agents in how to do it. 

Mr. SCOTT. Absolutely. No question about it. Many times, some 

of the very best investigators that we have in my district are deputy sheriffs, and these guys are terrific at what they do and we can 

all learn from those kind of people. 

Senator SESSIONS. And they do participate and they train. They 

are trainers at these conferences. 

Mr. SCOTT. Absolutely. 

Senator SESSIONS. It’s not just Federal people. 

Mr. SCOTT. Yes, sir. It’s not top down exclusively. 

Chairman BIDEN. I had to check. In Delaware, trafficking is 2 to 

25 years, and simple possession is zero to 2. But you’re right. 

Across the Nation, generally the Federal penalties are stronger and 

stiffer than State penalties, on balance, across the country, and 

even in Delaware, on simple possession. 

But thank you very much. I’m sure we’re going to want to talk 

to you again, or at least correspond with you, as this legislation 

wends its way through the process here and as we learn more. 

Thank you very, very much. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you again, Senator, for convening this hearing. I very much appreciate the opportunity to be here. 

Chairman BIDEN. Thank you. 

Now, our next panel. Our first witness will be Special Agent 

Flint Waters, who’s been referenced a number of times here, the 

lead agent in Wyoming’s Internet Crimes Against Children Task 

Force. He’s widely recognized as a national expert in this area of 

investigating online exploitation. He’s received numerous awards, 

including the 2006 Attorney General’s Special Commendation 

Award, and the 2006 National Center for Missing and Exploited 

Children Law Enforcement Leadership Award. He teaches throughVerDate Aug 31 2005 11:43 Nov 21, 2008 Jkt 044986 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\44986.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
18 

out the Nation and abroad, and is responsible for the creation of 

the largest Internet undercover operation in law enforcement history and we look forward to hearing from him in a moment. 

Next, is Lieutenant Robert Moses. He is the Unit Commander of 

the Delaware State Policy High Technology Crimes Unit. Lieutenant Moses has been employed as a police officer since 1981 and has 

been a detective since 1986. Lieutenant Moses is instrumental in 

the formation of the High Technology Crime Unit which was 

formed in 2001. He’s received hundreds of hours in network and 

computer forensic training and he’s recognized as a certified forensic computer examiner by the International Association of Computer Investigative Specialists. 

I understand from the Attorney General of Delaware, who I just 

happen to speak to from time to time, that Mr. Moses is the unquestioned leader in our State, and an indispensable part of the 

team of how to move on this. 

Mr. Hillman, again who’s been referenced, is the executive director of the Alabama District Attorney’s Association and the State 

Office of Prosecution Services, a position that he has held since 

2002. Prior to this, he was Chief Assistant D.A. for the Shelby 

County District Attorney’s Office, the 18th Judicial Circuit. I thank 

him again for being here. 

Michelle Collins is the executive director of Exploited Children’s 

Services at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. She directly oversees the cyber tip line, and she spearheaded 

the creation of the Child Victim Identification program and has 

worked with programmers to create the Child Recognition Identification system. 

Ms. Collins is an unquestioned national leader in this field and 

she travels domestically and internationally to educate law enforcement officers and policymakers in the many aspects of online exploitation in how to come up with critical techniques to help identify these victims. She also has her B.A. in psychology from George 

Mason and her Master’s in criminology from the University of 

Maryland. We welcome her as well. 

And last, but not least, is Grier Weeks. Mr. Weeks is the executive director of the National Association to Protect Children, PROTECT, which we’ve referenced here, a pro-child, anti-crime grassroots organization with members in 50 States. In 2006, he was 

among the founders of PROTECT. Since that time he’s led the organization’s effort to pass legislation and change child protection 

policy in 10 States. He frequently writes and speaks on child exploitation policy and has testified on this subject before the U.S. 

House of Representatives Judiciary Committee and the Energy and 

Commerce Committees. He lives in Asheville, North Carolina. 

We welcome you all. I would invite each of the witnesses, based 

upon the order in which they are called, to testify. 

The floor is yours. 

19 

STATEMENT OF SPECIAL AGENT FLINT WATERS, OFFICE OF 

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, STATE OF WYOMING ATTORNEY 

GENERAL, CHEYENNE, WYOMING 

Special Agent WATERS. Chairman Biden, Ranking Member Sessions, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on 

the subject of violence and exploitation against children. 

I am Flint Waters, Special Agent with the Wyoming State Division of Criminal Investigation. Robert Leesonby, Bill Wiltzy, and 

myself have been working recently on a system that I built 2 years 

ago to provide law enforcement with the ability to work these cases 

and investigate these details throughout the world. 

I’m here today, first, as a frontline investigator, as an officer who 

is pursuing these cases, serving the warrants, arresting the offenders, and rescuing children, and I see these challenges firsthand. 

Our system, known as Operation Fair Play, is a comprehensive infrastructure that gives law enforcement the tools they need to leverage the latest technologies to identify those who track and prey 

on children. 

Through this system we are able to provide solutions that assist 

in peer-to-peer investigations, web site investigations, chat room, 

and mobile telephone undercover operations. I want to emphasize 

at the start the importance of responding to this problem with a 

multi-pronged attack. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, through its cyber tip hotline, is serving the critical task of receiving 911 calls for help from citizens and Internet 

service providers. Having someone there to respond to these reports of suspected criminal activity is essential if we hope to make 

use of this valuable resource. 

Of course, it is also essential that law enforcement, to include 

State and local investigators, Internet Crimes Against Children 

Task Forces, the FBI, Homeland Security, and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service be ready not only to respond to these public reports, but to aggressively man a proactive attack as well. We cannot carry this fight without both a defense and an offense. 

I’d like to share with you a bit of the material that we see every 

day. One of the most frequently seen movies being distributed now 

is of a toddler on a changing table. The video zooms in on the 

child’s diaper as the child is being sexually penetrated by an unknown male. We’re seeing the rape of more and more very young 

children, and in fact we’re now seeing cases where the criminals 

are activating webcams, molesting their children, while participants out on the Internet watch and instruct them what to do. We 

rescued a Wyoming child in a case exactly like this. 

We are also seeing modifications to the movies and the images. 

Offenders are compiling the material in an online instruction manual that trains each other how to rape children and how to make 

it more difficult to detect and more difficult to find during forensic 

examination. If you want to see how much we can do, consider 

some of the children that we’ve already rescued. In San Diego, our 

system resulted in the arrest of a respiratory therapist at Children’s Hospital. 

This offender was molesting children that were in his care, often 

hospice care. He targeted, often, the non-verbal, representing the 

most defenseless and most helpless children he could find. This is 

20 

not the type of person that is going to show up a neat dateline. 

This is an individual who already has legitimate access to children. 

He’s using these horrific movies that he finds on the Internet to 

normalize his intentions to continue to victimize one child after another. 

Using these systems, we were able to find an offender in Ohio 

who had been seen over 800 times trading child pornography by 

law enforcement. This monster would film himself— 

Chairman BIDEN. Excuse me, sir. When you say ‘‘they have been 

seen’’, you mean, by Internet traffic, been seen. 

Special Agent WATERS. That’s correct, Senator. 

He would film himself tricking them into drinking juice, and film 

as he raped the children. Numerous children were rescued because 

this predator traded child pornography on the Internet. Intervening 

on behalf of these children is more than working in chat rooms, 

web sites, or peer-to-peer, it’s about placing law enforcement in 

every possible forum where the offenders are leveraging technology 

to victimize children, and we can do more. 

We can’t blame peer-to-peer systems or chat rooms or social networking sites. We are a society of technological advance. Sadly, 

there are a few that leverage those advances to hurt children. 

Blaming this problem on peer-to-peer innovation is like blaming 

the Internet highway system when someone chooses to transport 

drugs on it. 

What we have to do is scale our law enforcement, prosecutorial, 

and judicial resources to ensure that we as a society are prepared 

to respond to the challenges and can move along and keep up with 

the innovation. We need to ensure that the national computer forensic capacity can retrieve and present the evidence of these computers, projects like the FBI Forensics Labs, as well as partner solutions like the National Computer Forensic Institute in Alabama. 

To better understand how many offenders we could investigate, 

I’d like to show just some small details. In 2008 alone, we’ve seen 

over 1,400 IP addresses that have been found by law enforcement 

over 100 times. Imagine how many offenders— 

Chairman BIDEN. Could you explain that? Again, when you told 

me that the first time—maybe I’m just a little slower than most— 

but I wasn’t exactly sure what you meant. At the top it says, ‘‘USA 

PA 2,792’’. What does that mean? 

Special Agent WATERS. That means that law enforcement, while 

downloading child pornography, saw an individual in Pennsylvania 

who was offering to trade this material over 2,700 times since January 1st. 

Chairman BIDEN. So they were able to get, because of the number, an identification number that person had to have in order to 

be online, whether it’s through Comcast or whatever mechanism, 

they were able to go on and see that someone with a certain number had traded, 2,792 times, child pornography. Is that what this 

means? 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, Senator. He appeared as a source to 

us for child pornography that number of times. Yes, sir. 

Chairman BIDEN. OK. 

Special Agent WATERS. I would like to be clear, I am not saying 

that law enforcement isn’t doing enough with what they have. I’m 

21 

saying that there’s so much more they could do if they had the resources. 

Senators, I would ask you to picture the pile of work you leave 

waiting at the end of your day. Now imagine that in your in-box 

are hundreds of leads, and as you leave the office to go home, 

you’re walking away potentially from dozens of children that are 

waiting to be rescued, and each of these children must wonder if 

anybody cares. 

Please forgive the offensive nature of what I’m speaking about 

here today. I describe these despicable crimes to you because I hope 

you never have to see them. I want you to hear about the crimes 

being perpetrated on American children because I know you have 

some of the greatest power to intervene, and we can do more. 

Thank you very much for your time, and I will be available to 

answer any questions that you ask of me. 

Chairman BIDEN. During the question period I’m going to ask 

you to put up on the screen, if you’re able, an example of one of 

those folks and how you can tell by looking at that file what kind 

of material they’re trading in. 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, Senator. 

Chairman BIDEN. Is that possible? 

Special Agent WATERS. I will show the file names that are very 

egregious. Of course, we won’t show the images. 

Chairman BIDEN. No, I didn’t mean the images. 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, sir. 

Chairman BIDEN. All right. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Special Agent Waters appears as a 

submission for the record.] 

Chairman BIDEN. Lieutenant Moses, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT ROBERT C. MOSES, HIGH TECHNOLOGY CRIMES UNIT, DELAWARE STATE POLICE, DOVER, 

DELAWARE 

Lieutenant MOSES. Thank you, sir. Good afternoon, Chairman 

Biden, Ranking Member Sessions. My name is Lieutenant Robert 

Moses, and I am the officer in charge of the Delaware State Police 

High Technology Crimes Unit and the Delaware Child Predator 

Task Force. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the most successful law enforcement program, the Internet Crimes Against 

Children Task Force. 

I am particularly honored to be here with you and some of my 

peers in law enforcement. The dedication, knowledge, and skills of 

officers around the Nation, along with Federal funding, have 

helped to make the ICAC program such a success in Delaware and 

across the country. In particular, Flint Waters of the Wyoming 

ICAC has led the charge in his efforts against child sexual exploitation. His vision and technical skills have provided law enforcement officer agencies worldwide with Operation Fair Play. 

Operation Fair Play software allows law enforcement to 

proactively identify criminals who possess and distribute child pornography. By using the Wyoming ICAC software, we will have a 

profound effect on the safety of our children by saving them from 

the physical and psychological trauma of sexual abuse. 

22 

To be clear, possessors of child pornography are predators, but 

moreover, research has shown that at least 30 percent of all these 

individuals who possess child pornography have had sexual contact 

with a child as well. We see these cases in Delaware all the time. 

Once instance involved a father of an 18-month-old boy who 

videotaped himself sodomizing his baby. We have encountered a 

child therapist who counsels children with sexual disorders abusing 

his clients and downloading child pornography. You have just 

heard a sampling, but even that cannot prepare you for the shocking nature of the violent, degrading pornography we see every day 

in our investigation. 

In a process known as ‘‘grooming’’, predators use graphic material to lower the inhibitions of the children they are attempting to 

seduce. The predators use the same material in an effort to arouse 

the children or demonstrate the desired sexual acts. It cannot be 

forgotten that each time a graphic image moves on the Internet, 

the child in the photograph is being revictimized. 

Investigators must not only deal with the complicated technical, 

legal, and jurisdictional issues when the Internet and computers 

are involved, but we also need highly trained and equipped individuals to conduct the forensic examinations of electronic media 

seized. 

The forensic examiner provides the evidence necessary for the 

prosecution of online sexual exploitation and investigation, and also 

develops other investigative leads pointing to the identity of other 

victims or other suspects. 

In particular, the Delaware ICAC received three cyber tips from 

the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children regarding 

an individual who sent child pornography imagines via e-mail. The 

investigation revealed that the sender of the e-mail was Paul 

Fillman of Georgetown, Delaware. A forensic examination revealed 

images and videos of sexually abusive images of children, as well 

as nearly 3,000 online chat conversations between Fillman and 

other individuals. These chats were discussions of their desires to 

have sex with children as young as 18 months old. As a result of 

our investigation, nine suspects were turned over to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for prosecution, and five children were rescued. 

There are many success stories, but the lack of skilled computer 

forensic examiners, equipment, and lab facilities create a burden on 

law enforcement because it prevents the timely investigation and 

prosecution of electronic crime. In Delaware, we now have the 

Child Predator Task Force that streamlines the efforts of Federal, 

State, and local law enforcement agencies to proactively go after 

possessors of child pornography. The task force was initially formed 

as the Delaware Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force in 

2007 as a partnership between the Delaware State Police, the Delaware Department of Justice, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office. 

After receiving Federal ICAC grant funding last October, the 

task force secured additional training and equipment that is used 

by prosecutors and investigators who now work side by side in task 

force headquarters. The demands for fighting back against online 

sexual exploitations are intensive and will continue to increase dramatically as technology evolves. 

23 

With continued Federal funding and support from the Internet 

Crimes Against Children Task Force, we will continue to navigate 

the fast-changing terrain in an effort to outpace those who use the 

computer and the Internet to victimize our children. Thank you. 

Chairman BIDEN. Thank you very much. I appreciate it, Lieutenant. 

[The prepared statement of Lieutenant Moses appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman BIDEN. Mr. Hillman, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF RANDY HILLMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

ALABAMA DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S ASSOCIATION, MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 

Mr. HILLMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Sessions. My 

name is Randy Hillman. I am the executive director of the Alabama District Attorney’s Association and the Office of Prosecution 

Services in Alabama. I have spent the last 20 years of my life in 

this field and there is no profession, in my judgment, that is any 

more important than what we are doing. It is an honor and a privilege to appear before this committee today to talk about a subject 

that is so vital to what we do every day, and hopefully what we 

discuss here will make a difference for victims in years to come. 

While the Internet has been a great advancement and has made 

our world a much smaller place, it is not without its dark side. 

Those who would exploit our children, including child predators 

and child pornographers who were once relegated to back rooms 

and alleys to engage in their conduct, now with an Internet connection and a few clicks of a mouse they have an open window into 

our children’s bedrooms. 

Our research has indicated that State and local law enforcement 

in this country will handle well over 90 percent of the numbers of 

cases that are going through the criminal justice system in a year, 

probably in excess of 95 percent, and probably even higher than 

that. 

State and local law enforcement and prosecutors are the emergency room doctors of the criminal justice system. We are on the 

front lines of fighting this fight and fighting child predators and 

molesters every day. In the past 50 years, there have been basically two watershed events that have occurred in the criminal justice system: the first is the advent of the science of DNA, and the 

next is digital evidence and digital storage devices. While DNA is 

relevant in many investigations and it is critical to those investigations, the numbers of cases that we’re seeing that involve digital 

evidence far, far outweighs what we see with DNA. 

State and local law enforcement and prosecutors are trained and 

skilled in investigating robbery cases, murders, rapes, and other 

similar crimes. Yet, too often when a call comes in to the local police department and says that a child is being cyber stalked for 

purposes of sex or what have you, we are at a loss. We don’t have 

a clue what to do with those cases. While some larger law enforcement departments have available resources to handle them, other 

agencies are simply caught short. 

Simply put, we know about blood and bullets but we are sorely 

lacking in our ability to deal with megabytes and megapixels. The 

24 

most glaring disconnect in all of this is the lack of training for 

State and local law enforcement. That is due to basically two factors: the first is the availability of that training, and second, and 

just as important, is the cost of that training. That is the Achilles’ 

heel of State and local law enforcement training all across the spectrum of crimes that we deal with. We frankly just do not have the 

money to train. In this case, with these types of crimes, we do not 

have the availability of training. 

What we are asking this committee and you all to do, is help leverage State and local law enforcement as a tool. Make us your 

army out there, watching, prosecuting, pushing, and investigating 

these predators. The National Computer Forensics Institute, which 

Senator Sessions referenced earlier, was created as a solution to 

the lack of this cyber crime training for law enforcement, prosecutors, and trial judges throughout the United States. 

This training facility was conceived, developed, and will soon 

begin implementation of curricula driven from a law enforcement 

perspective. The methods employed there are time-tested and proven in countless courts across this Nation. Purposefully it is not 

from academia and it is not merely a theoretical exercise, but it is 

designed to maximize our ability to catch and incarcerate cyber 

criminals and child molesters. 

The NCFI is a partnership between Federal, State, and local governments who recognize the huge void in this area and join together to solve the problem. This partnership includes the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Secret Service, the State 

of Alabama, the Alabama District Attorney’s Association, and the 

city of Hoover, Alabama. It is approximately 90 percent complete 

and will begin training State and local law enforcement, prosecutors, and trial judges May 19, 2008, about a month from now. 

Once complete, we will have the ability to train nearly 1,700 students per year in all facets of digital evidence, from first responders, to network intrusion, to the true forensic examinations. Most 

importantly for today’s hearing, the NCFI will equip State and 

local law enforcement officers to effectively investigate child pornography cases. The NCFI will teach law enforcement to use the 

most advanced law enforcement technology, including the technique that was so aptly presented to you a few minutes ago by 

Flint Waters. 

In addition to classroom and hands-on instruction, we will have 

students practice courtroom skills using the in-house ‘‘Smart Courtroom’’ that we have placed at that facility. This training will be 

provided at absolutely no cost to any of the trainees, and many of 

those trainees will leave there with equipment, and software, and 

hardware to do what we’ve just trained them to do. Again, that is 

the impediment that we get when we do this training with State 

and local law enforcement. When they go home, they do not have 

the ability to do what we have trained them to do and we are taking care of that through this center. 

Because the NCFI was designed by law enforcement for law enforcement, because we have a brand-new state-of-the-art facility 

that was designed exclusively for this kind of training, because this 

training is free of charge to all participants, and because this is our 

25 

sole function, this is all we do, I am convinced that the NCFI is 

one of the best tools this Nation has to fill this training gap. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, you are truly in 

a unique position here. You are able to impact the lives of those 

children who cannot help themselves. 

They are our most precious asset, and at the same time they’re 

the most vulnerable. I would humbly ask, on behalf of all law enforcement, Federal, State, that you give us the training and the 

tools we so desperately need to see that our children are safe from 

those that would harm them. 

Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman BIDEN. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hillman appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman BIDEN. Ms. Collins, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF MICHELLE COLLINS, EXPLOITED CHILD UNIT, 

NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 

Ms. COLLINS. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I welcome this opportunity to appear before you to discuss child sexual exploitation. To begin with though, 

our president at the National Center, Ernie Allen, is unable to attend today. He sends his sincere regrets. He is currently out of the 

country meeting with financial leaders to discuss different ways 

and efforts to eradicate commercial child pornography. 

Ernie has also asked me, on behalf of himself as well as the National Center’s Board of Directors, former Chairman Robbie 

Calloway who is currently with me, to publicly express our sincere 

thank you to you for your central role in the creation of the National Center 24 years ago and your leadership with children. 

Chairman BIDEN. Who is that important guy sitting next to 

Robbie? 

Ms. COLLINS. There you go. Manus Cooney. 

Chairman BIDEN. Manus Cooney used to run this committee for 

a long time. Manus, it is great to see you. You are a first-rate guy. 

Glad to see you here. 

Mr. COONEY. Had a few hours in this room. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman BIDEN. Thank you. 

Ms. COLLINS. Well, as you know, the National Center is a notfor-profit corporation mandated by Congress, working in partnership with the Department of Justice. For 24 years, the National 

Center has worked under a congressional and statutory mandate to 

conduct specific operational functions, including our various programs to fight child sexual exploitation. 

The National Center is attacking the problem of child sexual exploitation in several ways. One, we are fighting commercial child 

pornography on the Internet through mobilizing financial companies and have seen the use of credit cards to purchase child pornography virtually eliminate. 

We are fighting non-commercial child pornography on the Internet by working with industry leaders to develop new technology 

tools to disrupt the traffic. With the hub of a national background 

26 

screening pilot that has identified individuals with criminal histories who are seeking to volunteer in positions that would give 

them access to children, we support the U.S. Marshals and State 

and local law enforcement in an effort to track down the estimated 

100,000 missing sex offenders. 

Our longest running program to date is the cyber tip line to fight 

the exploitation of children. Mandated by Congress, the cyber tip 

line is operating in partnership with the FBI, ICE, the Postal Inspection Service, the ICAC task forces, U.S. Secret Service, and 

CIOS at the Justice Department, as well as with local and State 

law enforcement agencies. We are receiving reports regarding 

seven types of crime against children online, including child pornography and enticement against children. 

The reports are being made both by members of the public, as 

well as electronic service providers who are required by law to report apparent child pornography to the cyber tip line. Our analysts 

will then evaluate the content and related information, determine 

the geographic location of the apparent criminal act, and then provide all of that information to law enforcement for appropriate investigation. 

Also, our reports are triaged so any child that’s in imminent danger would get first priority. The FBI, ICE, and Postal Inspection 

Service all assign agents and analysts to work at the National Center. In the 10 years since we began the cyber tip line we’ve received 

over 580,000 reports regarding child sexual exploitation. Electronic 

service providers, in fact, have reported more than 5 million images 

of child abuse to the National Center. 

In addition, law enforcement has submitted more than 13 million 

images and videos of child pornography in the last 5 years alone 

to the Victim Identification Program. Our analysts there are working to help prosecutors secure convictions, as well as help law enforcement identify children that are currently being abused and 

need to be rescued. Last week alone in that effort, we reviewed 

more than 166,000 images and videos of child pornography. 

Because of our role working in these programs we have an unparalleled depth of knowledge regarding various ways across the 

platforms on the Internet that children are being victimized. Each 

of the platforms online, whether it be the World Wide Web, e-mail, 

news groups, peer-to-peer, provide different ways for individuals to 

exploit children, whether it allows them to directly communicate 

with a child or it allows them to discretely trade these types of files 

online. 

The 18 million images that the National Center has reviewed actually came from a variety of these platforms. At the back of my 

written testimony I’ve actually included several success stories 

across the country regarding ways that law enforcement has 

worked cases that children have been victimized in a variety of the 

platforms. 

Because of the diversity within the Internet, law enforcement 

uses a variety of tools and techniques to try to detect and investigate the range of crimes against children, from enticement of children on social networking sites to distribution of child pornography 

by the web, e-mail, and peer-to-peer networks. Law enforcement is 

actively engaged in the technology in these investigations every 

27 

day using similar tools and techniques across State, local, and Federal levels. 

After 10 years of working at the National Center and working 

with law enforcement who investigate these types of cases, I am 

pleased to say that law enforcement at all levels are working more 

closely than ever before on these important investigations and the 

level of cooperation really is unprecedented and has led to the rescue of thousands of children. 

The cyber tip line is a major source of leads for law enforcement. 

It streamlines the process from detection to conviction. The process 

increases the efficiency of law enforcement and maximizes their 

limited resources. I cannot over-emphasize the need for increased 

funding for all law enforcement programs on the local, State, and 

Federal level. 

Despite the progress that has been made in the fight against 

child sexual exploitation, it is well accepted that there are simply 

more of these potential cases than there are trained law enforcement officers to investigate them. But I can assure you that any 

additional resources to build capacity across the country will lead 

to more prosecutions and rescue more children, and that is what 

we are all working toward. 

Thank you very much. 

Chairman BIDEN. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Collins appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman BIDEN. Mr. Weeks? 

STATEMENT OF GRIER WEEKS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION TO PROTECT CHILDREN, ASHEVILLE, 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Mr. WEEKS. Senator Biden, thank you very much for allowing us 

to be here and for driving this train. 

I want to correct one thing: PROTECT was founded in 2002. 

That was our mistake. We’ve got probably the most broad spectrum 

of people that I’ve ever seen, all who just come around one issue, 

which is protecting children. 

One of the things that we do at the State level is work with legislatures to get the State resources to leverage the Federal dollars 

you are considering here today. In the last year, we’ve gotten 

money from States to essentially match or complement the Federal 

investment in California, Tennessee, and Virginia. 

It is new ground, because essentially what we’re doing is explaining to the States how this Federal task force program has worked, 

and is saying to them, now it’s your turn to step up to the plate. 

It will make all the difference in the world. 

I want to add one thing here that I didn’t put in my written testimony. In listening to the way people have discussed this today, 

I want to suggest one way of looking at this that I think is critical. 

This is not just yet one more rotten thing we do to kids. I think 

a lot of people, the tendency would be to walk away and say, I 

thought I’d heard it all, you wouldn’t believe what I heard today. 

This is actually the linchpin. This is enormously important historically, the technology that we now have in our reach, and I’ll explain why. 

28 

These are not just unbelievable movies and pictures, these are 

crime scene recordings. They are the proof—the proof—of massive 

child sexual abuse. These will lead us to the rescues and to the 

children. If you think about it, you might flip the question around 

that was asked many times today: how many possessors are abusers? What I would suggest is you ask: how many abusers are possessors? Because if you look at it at the local level, with all the legions of cases that are languishing in Child Protective Services or 

in the courts and nobody can prove it and the poor kid just can’t 

get resolution, how many of those guys have child pornography? Instead of that fragile kid on the witness stand, you’ve got a hard 

drive. So, this is how we’re going to get them. 

I also want to say that the maps that we’ve seen today are not 

just graphics of Internet activity. They’re not just maps to show us 

where the perpetrators are, these are child rescue maps. Those dots 

represent kids that desperately need us to come to those doors. 

Law enforcement is now providing you with the information that 

can lead authorities very predictably to tens of thousands of locations within the U.S. where children are waiting. I hope that Agent 

Waters will have a chance, privately or in this hearing, to explain 

how they are able to prioritize and target with a real high likelihood of finding actual victims, and that is revolutionary. 

The reason why these are rescue maps is because, while every 

single one of these people—or the vast majority of them—are contributing to a black market in child exploitation, as we heard 

today, a lot of them are also sexual preying on children in their 

communities. The ramifications of this are clear. We now have, for 

the first time in American history, the ability to interdict and stop 

these crimes against children on a massive scale. 

In the interest of time, I just want to touch on a few key points 

that I think it’s important for the Committee to understand well. 

The first is, as you know as the author of this bill, the numberone issue is resources. With this kind of onslaught, the other things 

we can do are important. We need better State laws, we need better regulation of industry, but if we don’t have the cops to go do 

anything about it, it’s not going to get us very far. So the resources 

really are the key thing. 

I think it’s also important the Committee know that the FBI Innocent Images Unit—and this is one example of one of these law 

enforcement prongs in this attack, but a very important one—operates with essentially the same congressional funding that HUD 

gave Rhode Island for homeless assistance. It is a cause dear to 

me, but we’re talking about the size of a mid-sized real estate office, basically. They have 32 people, but of those, there’s 13 agents 

and 6 analysts. They can’t come up here, or they don’t come up 

here and tell you: help, the house is burning down. That’s critical. 

To make things worse, as it came out in the House hearings, 

what little they do have has been diverted to a large extent by the 

FBI. They essentially acknowledged in the House hearing in October that they had sent about $4 million of their little budget over 

to the Internet Crimes Complaint Center. Under some embarrassing circumstances, they said they wouldn’t do that any more. 

I think the point here is, that unit needs a huge increase in resources whether the brass likes it or not, and they need the acVerDate Aug 31 2005 11:43 Nov 21, 2008 Jkt 044986 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\44986.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
29 

countability that’s in your bill to make sure that they spend it the 

right way. 

I quickly want to touch on two other things. One critical issue 

that is looming here that’s of the utmost importance as a policy 

matter is the future of the Wyoming-based network, which is essentially the only deconfliction system in the country. The Department of Justice has announced that it’s planning to do this project 

where they move a lot of this stuff to the RIAS network. We think 

that that is actually a very good goal long term. 

It needs to be done very carefully and hand in hand with what’s 

on the ground already out there in Wyoming. We’ve heard along 

the way some concerning talk about maybe privatizing or 

outsourcing this, whether it’s to a university—that was discussed 

for months in the system, sort of—or to a private entity. We would 

strongly oppose that. We think this is critical law enforcement information that needs to stay with law enforcement. I would encourage the Committee to closely watch DOJ as that goes forward in 

how that is handled. 

I would like to close, Senator, with a brief statement, just a few 

sentences, that the Surviving Parents Coalition asked us to share 

with you. You know them very well. These are Americans who 

have paid unthinkable prices for the wisdom that they’ve gotten, 

and by all rights might never talk about child pornography. It 

seems like a little counterintuitive even in this country that they 

would be focused on this, but they are because they understand, 

again, the strategic importance of this issue. 

Ed Smart asked me to read this to you. They say: ‘‘As parents 

of missing and exploited children, we doubt there will be a more 

effective way of helping children than the ICAC task force program. More children will be rescued and saved from living nightmares than in any other effort that has been made. Enabling this 

team with the proper funding and the most effective tools will 

change the only 2 percent investigated. When we look at the thousands of programs currently in effect, none of them can compare to 

the possibilities of the ICACs in dollars spent for lives rescued.’’ 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Weeks appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman BIDEN. Thank you all very, very much. Again, having 

been involved for a long time in drafting legislation dealing with 

violent crimes of all sorts, one of the most important things to do, 

I think, is to lay out accurately, without exaggeration—and none 

of you have exaggerated—the nature of the problem we’re attempting to solve, as well as laying out for the public at large just how 

heinous this is, to be able to generate the necessary controlled outrage for people to prioritize, where is the most important place to 

place the resources of this country, which are limited. 

So one of the things I did, and I hope at some point I will get— 

I would ask Mr. Waters to come back with some of you and maybe 

gather up a number of my colleagues in a closed room. Some of this 

is so offensive, it is so violative of the conscience and the sensibilities of most Americans, that although it’s real, it is not salacious 

in the sense that it’s designed to in any way arouse an interest, but 

it is somewhat as sickening. But I don’t think people—I think the 

30 

examples that you gave, Bob, about what happened down in 

Seaford, having a father doing what he was doing, I mean, I think 

people find it so, so beyond the realm that it’s almost unbelievable. 

So what I’d like to ask you to do, if I may, Flint—and I’ll rely 

on your judgment here—and it would be very hard, fortunately, for 

the cameras to pick up exactly the titles, but if you would do what 

you did for me and bring up—it doesn’t have to be the most egregious offender in terms of the total number. Bring up—first of all, 

explain for the record ‘‘peer-to-peer’’, what that means. I know the 

vast majority of Americans do, but a lot don’t know what that 

means. Speak to me for a second about what you said to me which 

really struck a chord with me. You said, it used to be this all was 

a commercial transaction. I asked you, what is made by this? 

There’s no money changing hands in this area. 

So while we focus on commercialization of child pornography, 

which is important to do, my impression is, within the next 5 

years, there’s really no need. If you own a computer, all you’ve got 

to do is go on these peer-to-peer networks and you’ll find the most 

graphic and outrageous movies. I mean, some of these movies are 

how long? 

Special Agent WATERS. Twenty, thirty minutes. 

Chairman BIDEN. Twenty, thirty minutes. So it’s not like you’ve 

got to go to a commercial outlet or a vendor who is selling child 

pornography in the same way that pornography is able to be sold 

legally for adults over the counter and on networks, et cetera. 

So I was impressed with how widespread this peer-to-peer trading is. If you could briefly—and I’ll not ask any more questions. I’ll 

yield to my colleague. Briefly explain what you mean by peer-topeer. Distinguish between that and traditional commercial transactions to acquire child pornography. Then give an example of how, 

without any intrusion, because this is being done out in the open, 

in effect. This is a transaction that’s occurring out in the open. 

You don’t have to, other than have the software capability, of 

being able to figure out how to narrow it down. So if you’d go 

through a little explanation of what you would do if you went on 

a peer-to-peer network and said, you know, the little ID box, what 

do you want? I mean, do a little bit of that for us, and then how 

you can identify people who have engage in certain kinds of trafficking to give you an insight into how much of a predator they are. 

Special Agent WATERS. Thank you, Senator. The peer-to-peer 

networks, by themselves, are actually a very impressive computer 

design that allows people to share files on a wide scale with a high 

volume of trading. It is unfortunate that there are some that are 

using it to exchange these images of child pornography. The way 

the system is set up, whatever material you wish to trade, be it 

legal material, maybe you have a small band and you’re sharing 

your music, you can make that collection available by downloading 

peer-to-peer applications, put all your music in that shared folder, 

and allow other people on the network to get it very quickly. 

It transfers that very fast from one computer directly to the collection of another computer in their home. It’s referred to as peerto-peer because the structure of the system is set so that after finding the other sources of the material I don’t have to communicate 

31 

with any centralized server. I can just talk from my computer to 

theirs and get their collection. 

Now, unfortunately in this area where we’re working we’re finding the folks whose collections consist of movies depicting the rape 

of children. We can go on very quickly by downloading various 

peer-to-peer applications. We can enter in a search term consistent 

with the type of criminal conduct we’re investigating. Once we 

launch that search term, we are presented with a menu on our 

screen of all the types of child pornography that’s available at that 

moment and we can look through the names and pick whatever it 

is of interest to that person. 

Now, in our case we’re working on the material where the crimes 

are very egregious, the children are very young, high levels of violence. We’ll pick those files for download, and in a matter of seconds we start receiving those movies onto our computer. In addition to the transfer of the movie, we can see— 

Chairman BIDEN. Do you know where those movies are coming 

from? 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, we do, Senator. 

Chairman BIDEN. That’s the critical point. 

Special Agent WATERS. We can see—in our software we can actually display it as a map, but we can see the IP address of origin 

where this transfer is taking place. 

Chairman BIDEN. What is an ‘‘IP address of origin’’? What does 

that mean? 

Special Agent WATERS. An IP address is just, in essence, the 

Internet phone number. It’s the method that the computers use to 

find each other. It’s normally not viewable— 

Chairman BIDEN. And are you able, through that IP address, to 

determine the actual person who owns that, that has that number? 

How do you do that? 

Special Agent WATERS. In many cases we can by submitting a 

court process to a service provider and asking them who has the 

IP number. 

Chairman BIDEN. Give me an idea of a service provider. 

Special Agent WATERS. Perhaps, well, you mentioned Comcast. 

We have many that we work with. We can send them a subpoena. 

We give them the address and we give them the time: we saw a 

crime at this precise moment; can they tell us what subscriber had 

it? It’s not necessarily the suspect, but it tells us the physical location to start and then from there we track it back to their collection. 

Chairman BIDEN. OK. Now, give us a little demonstration. 

Special Agent WATERS. I pulled out a list, just a random sampling of file names from an individual. Without giving up too much 

investigative detail and allowing these individuals to hide, I can 

display these files names to the screen. I would warn folks, now, 

that this is very egregious material, extremely offensive. I’ll put it 

up briefly. 

Chairman BIDEN. It’s like a film, like ‘‘Butch Cassidy and the 

Sundance Kid’’, only it has ‘‘Raping of a Three-Year-Old’’ kind of 

title, right? 

Special Agent WATERS. That’s correct, Senator. 

32 

Chairman BIDEN. So I don’t need you to make it any clearer for 

the television. My point is, the verbiage we see on that screen are 

literally the titles of each of the files that have been downloaded 

and transferred to someone else’s computer. Is that correct? 

Special Agent WATERS. That is correct, Senator. 

Chairman BIDEN. And so there are probably, what, 30, 40, 50? 

How many? I can’t read them from here, and don’t want to read 

them. 

Special Agent WATERS. I cut out maybe 20 out of just one suspect’s collection. 

Chairman BIDEN. Right. So that if you went into that and you 

saw that what was being traded by that suspect or acquired by 

that suspect were things that related to violent behavior, the rape 

of a 3-year-old—I mean, I read what you had in my office. I mean, 

they’re graphic descriptions— 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, sir. 

Chairman BIDEN.—of what the video will contain. So you would 

be able to, an investigator, looking at that file you can easily access—you don’t need a court order, you don’t need anything to access what is sitting out there on the Internet, right? 

Special Agent WATERS. That’s correct. We can download it like 

any member of the public. 

Chairman BIDEN. Like any member of the public, as if you were 

the one seeking the file, like you were in the peer-to-peer network 

and they could download it to you, right? 

Special Agent WATERS. That’s correct, sir. 

Chairman BIDEN. And so you can look at those titles and then 

you can actually look at it. You can click on, because it doesn’t cost 

anything. 

Special Agent WATERS. Right. 

Chairman BIDEN. You can click on and actually view what that 

particular file has in it. Correct? 

Special Agent WATERS. That’s correct. 

Chairman BIDEN. And you’re able to, if you had the time and unlimited resources, determine whether or not, on a repeated basis, 

multiple times, the person whose computer was acquiring this material had watched ‘‘Fifty Different Ways to Rape a Three-Year-Old 

Child’’, or a 7-year-old child, or whatever. Correct? 

Special Agent WATERS. From our subsequent investigation, that’s 

correct. 

Chairman BIDEN. Yes. So there is a way. What Jeff and I were 

talking about—excuse us for being so colloquial here, but one of the 

disadvantages, but advantages, of having only a couple of members 

here at the time is it can be more conversational. 

What we were talking about is—excuse me for referencing it this 

way, Jeff—Senator Sessions said, we can get our arms around this. 

We can handle this. This is doable. It’s not like this problem is so 

gigantic and so out of our ability to deal with it. People just go, oh, 

God, it’s so big, we just can’t deal with it. You could literally, based 

upon a set of criteria, if you had unlimited resources, narrow down 

the field of people who are the most likely to be the most violent 

and deviant people in this whole field of child pornography, 

couldn’t you? 

33 

Special Agent WATERS. Well, anecdotally we’ve been able to narrow it down and catch— 

Chairman BIDEN. Because it’s not scientifically tested. 

Special Agent WATERS. Right. 

Chairman BIDEN. But if a guy or woman is downloading pornography that has traditional sexual activity between a young woman 

who you don’t know whether is 14 or 19, but is outrageously pornographic, that’s one thing. If you have another thing of someone 

being tied down, beaten and raped repeatedly and someone filming 

it, or a father saying, this is my daughter, watch me rape my 

daughter who happens to be 6 years old, you’re likely dealing with 

a more pernicious element of society. That’s all I mean. Right? 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, sir. 

Chairman BIDEN. And you can, by looking at the files, get a pretty good—you can increase the probability, at least anecdotally, that 

you’re going to focus on and target on the most egregious offenders 

out there. 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, sir. That’s correct. 

Chairman BIDEN. Now, the reason I mention this, and I’m going 

to stop, years ago one of the sort of criminology epiphanies I had 

as a young Senator was a study done in the early 1980’s in the 

California prison system, showing that 6 percent of the criminals 

behind bars in California committed over 50 percent of the violent 

crimes that were committed in that State over a certain period of 

time. Career criminals commit significantly more crimes than the 

occasional guy. The career criminal pool is relatively small. 

So what we’re trying to do—and I’ll hush—is take limited resources and target them where you get the single biggest bang for 

the buck. I would like to prosecute every single person who, other 

than accidentally, found themselves being a purveyor of child pornography. 

As you said—give me the example of the young woman you said 

who just haunted you, whose face you would see repeatedly, and 

how many tens of thousands of people across the world—you 

showed me a worldwide map where that one digital image of this 

young woman being repeatedly molested was literally—you showed 

me day by day, like a virus, how the image of that act against her 

was disseminated worldwide. Talk about that just for a second. 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, Senator. Because we are able to 

track by hash value the files as they’re being traded, or the digital 

signature of the files, we looked at the image from one child, one 

little girl, a toddler, who had been horribly abused and we tracked 

where law enforcement was given the opportunity to receive that 

file, or that series of files on that little girl. We found over a million 

instances where law enforcement was presented the chance to get 

just her victimization, and it was all over the world. 

Chairman BIDEN. Explain what you mean by ‘‘law enforcement’’, 

because people misunderstand that. It’s making it sound like that 

this image went straight to the precinct headquarters and said, by 

the way, this is happening. What you mean by ‘‘presented’’, you 

mean it was repeated over a million times on the Internet that you 

could track, you could see it being punched up a million times, figuratively speaking. Explain. 

34 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, sir. Undercover police officers working in the peer-to-peer environment were presented opportunities 

to download those movies, so we tracked the origin, where they 

were presented that opportunity from. It traveled all over the 

world. It was unbelievable, the saturation. To look at the map of 

her victimization and realize that that’s the world that she has to 

grow up in, she’s got to— 

Chairman BIDEN. Even if she’s rescued, even if she’s taken out 

of that circumstance, for the rest of her life there’s a file out there 

where millions of people have looked at and watched her graphically being abused. Is that correct? 

Special Agent WATERS. That’s correct, Senator. 

Chairman BIDEN. And last, give me the example, because it’s important for people to know, I think, of the young woman whose 

brother identified—explain to me how—you point out it’s hard 

sometimes to go back and identify that young girl and actually 

‘‘free’’ her from her circumstance. 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, sir. 

Chairman BIDEN. You can pick up the people. You don’t know, 

of the million people who had that file, who originated that file so 

you don’t know who the rapist is in that case. But explain to me, 

explain for the record the case you told me about, the young brother in the library and what happened. 

Special Agent WATERS. We have had investigations, and one in 

particular, where we watched this little girl grow up. In our forensic examinations over a period of several months, we would start 

seeing her picture change. We would see new images of her victimization. And this little girl would look at the camera and we would 

look into her eyes as we were running these forensics, and it started to haunt us. 

We saw her grow up, so much so that over the years I would find 

myself apologizing to the pictures of this child that no one had 

found her. It was actually the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children that contacted us and let us know that, in her 

case, she had been rescued because a family member had come 

across her picture while being on the Internet and had confronted, 

and disclosure was made. I don’t want to give— 

Chairman BIDEN. But it was the brother, correct? 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, sir, it was. 

Chairman BIDEN. It’s amazing. It’s amazing. I just wish there 

was some way we could—there’s no way to sanitize this ugliness, 

but I wish there was some way that would shock the conscience of 

America just to see so much of this going on. I don’t think we’d 

have trouble getting the resources if they had a clear notion of 

what it meant. 

At any rate, I’ve taken much too much time, Jeff. I’m sorry. The 

floor is yours, and the panel is yours. 

Senator SESSIONS. No, no. Thank you for your leadership and expression of concern. I have developed that same philosophy about 

crime. There’s just not that many people who will murder somebody, not that many people who will rape somebody, and I’m sure 

even a less number of people that will—I don’t know whether it’s 

any less, but there’s only a certain number of people that will molest a young child. They can be targeted. 

35 

Unfortunately, psychologists have told me that, if you’re really 

honest about it, treatment is not very helpful. Discipline, arrest, 

punishment, incarceration are the only thing we know that work. 

Would you agree with that, Ms. Collins and Mr. Weeks, that we 

have not come forward with an effective treatment or cure for these 

activities? 

Ms. COLLINS. I have not, as of yet, heard of a cure. I know that 

there’s a lot of research and professionals who treat sex offenders. 

It was referenced earlier, at the Buttner Federal Correctional Center down in, I believe, North Carolina, they are also working with 

sexual predators who are arrested for child pornography-related 

crimes. I agree that when an offender is put in jail, at least there 

you have the guarantee that they’re not going to be able to victimize another child for whatever amount of time that they’re going 

to be incarcerated. 

Senator SESSIONS. I don’t know if we have any numbers. Has 

anyone attempted to ascertain any number of people in the United 

States who are pedophiles, who have these kind of tendencies and 

have taken these kind of actions? Do any of you all know? 

[No response]. 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, I think it is clear, and I think Senator 

Biden is correct, that if we are more sophisticated and more effective in utilizing existing resources and additional resources, including utilizing the technological breakthroughs that you’ve made, Mr. 

Waters, and Randy, that you’ve worked on, I know, we can more 

effectively reduce the number of people who are abusing children 

in America. We can actually bring that number down. Would you 

agree, Mr. Waters? 

Special Agent WATERS. Absolutely, Senator. Absolutely. 

Senator SESSIONS. Lieutenant Moses, would you? 

Lieutenant MOSES. Yes, sir. 

Senator SESSIONS. Randy? 

Mr. HILLMAN. Absolutely, Senator. 

Senator SESSIONS. Would you agree with that? 

Mr. WEEKS. I think not only can we do that, but we can measure 

it, we can count our success. We’ve spent billions of dollars in this 

country on prevention and awareness campaigns and we had no 

idea what the impact was. Can I also say, Senator, you raised a 

point earlier that I really wanted to agree with. You asked the 

question of whether it would be helpful to have sort of a registry 

of officers who were trained in this. I think that’s an extremely important thing, because we see at the local level, even good-sized, 

fairly sophisticated police departments who are very sort of insecure about what in the world to do with a lead like this. You really 

need a contact in those places. The ICACs at this point are just little skeleton crews out there. They can’t do all this themselves. 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, I love the FBI and have great respect for 

them. But the way I read their report, the U.S. Attorney’s analysis, 

they’ve got 32 people in the entire FBI who are experts and know 

how to handle this; 260 have worked on a case at one point in their 

life. That means they may have helped the expert execute a search 

warrant. So, I’m not impressed. We do need more people like Mr. 

Waters, like Lieutenant Moses, who are full-time, have studied 

these issues. 

36 

If you know what you’re doing you can be a lot more effective. 

Wouldn’t you agree, Lieutenant Moses? If you have some specialty 

in it and all the search warrant rules, the defenses that will come 

up, the legal statutes and penalties, the expertise you gain after 

doing a number of these cases is very, very valuable. 

Lieutenant MOSES. On-the-job experience is the best. I mean, 

that’s the way you learn, out there on the street, doing it every 

day, investigating these type of crimes. 

Senator SESSIONS. Mr. Waters, you mentioned the National Computer Forensic Science Institute as a potential solution. Mr. 

Hillman has talked about it. But centers where people could come 

for some rather significant and intensive training throughout this 

whole area of prosecutions, in your opinion, would be helpful for 

the country? 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, I believe they’d be extremely helpful, 

not only in recovering the evidence so that we can prosecute that 

offender, but so that we will recover his collection and possibly find 

victims that we didn’t previously know about by recovering those 

digital photos and movies. 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, in my experience in the prosecuting of 

child pornography, we often did find victims. Is that your experience? 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, it is. 

Senator SESSIONS. What about you? 

Lieutenant MOSES. Yes, sir, it is. 

Senator SESSIONS. Mr. Hillman? 

Mr. HILLMAN. Yes, sir. 

Senator SESSIONS. Any of the others want to comment on that? 

[No response]. 

Senator SESSIONS. In other words, some people say, so we’ve got 

some bad pictures, even bad pictures of children. Why is that important? Because Buttner said that 85 percent of the people they 

have in the jail—that’s the Federal jail that has psychological expertise in handling people—have admitted to abusing children. I 

suppose some of them didn’t admit it that did it, so we’re talking 

about probably 90 percent or more. It’s just not the normal person 

who collects child abusive pornography. This is a small but very 

dangerous group that we need to focus on. 

Mr. Hillman, what are some of the things you train on and are 

doing and expect to train on when you’re fully operational for an 

average police detective that may come there to be trained? How 

can you help that person do their job better? 

Mr. HILLMAN. Thank you, Senator. We have, for State and local 

law enforcements, there are basically three curricula that we have 

set up. The entry-level curricula, which is probably the most bodies 

that we will handle through the center, is designed for the frontline investigator. It is that guy who will be out working these cases 

or starting these investigations. This curriculum will literally take 

a computer—we start them from the ground up and we work them 

up in their capacity and their knowledge of digital evidence. 

They physically take a computer and take it apart and they learn 

about each part as it is being torn down, and then they put it back 

together. Then you go from that into a more intense, here’s what 

it does and how it does, and when it does store information, here’s 

37 

how you reach and grab it, or here’s how to unplug, or when to 

unplug, a computer. Here’s what you advise local law enforcement. 

You use those individuals who go through this basic training to 

them be a train-the-trainer type. 

Senator SESSIONS. Back in their department. 

Mr. HILLMAN. Yes, sir. They will be instructed on all sorts of investigation techniques. And then the next level of training was a 

network intrusion training, which I think will last around 4 weeks, 

which also deals with a lot of the things that Mr. Waters is dealing 

with. Then the ultimate training there— 

Senator SESSIONS. You will train them in the techniques that 

Mr. Waters has perfected? 

Mr. HILLMAN. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And the last level of training is 

a 5-week course that is intense. It is the true forensic capability 

where you can take a machine, download what is in it—or image 

the hard drive in the case of these types of investigations—break 

it down, decide where the computer has been, what it’s been doing, 

who’s been doing it, and then you produce a report and then be 

available to testify to the District Attorney or in the courtroom. 

Senator SESSIONS. And qualify as an expert? 

Mr. HILLMAN. Yes, sir. Absolutely. 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, that’s good. 

Mr. Waters, you established a standard method for local officers 

to get a search warrant. Still, Mr. Hillman, there are things you 

have to do. You’re a prosecutor. You can’t just go and peruse 

everybody’s computer. You train the officers in what is legal and 

established and approved and how to get warrants when they need 

a warrant, do you not? 

Mr. HILLMAN. Yes, sir. Absolutely. And then the second level is, 

we train the prosecutors to help the investigators get the search 

warrants and navigate those through the system, and we will train 

the judges who will receive the search warrant to sign off on it. We 

have had that happen more than I care to admit, where judges will 

refuse to sign a search warrant because they don’t understand 

what they’re seeing in the search warrant. 

Senator SESSIONS. They don’t understand what the current law 

is and they don’t understand computers well enough to apply the 

law to the event. 

Mr. HILLMAN. Yes, sir. 

Senator SESSIONS. It makes them nervous. It would make me 

nervous. 

Mr. Waters, so you have developed some models for search warrants. I’ve got to tell you, I am sure that is a critical step in this 

process. Is it? Briefly, how does it work? 

Special Agent WATERS. Yes, Senator, it is critical that we get the 

search warrants put together. In a lot of ways we have developed 

the models from hard knocks. We take them before our State and 

Federal judges and we find out where we’ve messed up, and they 

make it clear and we make it right next time. We have, over the 

course of these 3 years, put together warrants now that are extremely solid. I don’t know of any cases where they’ve been overturned, and mostly it’s just because of learning from the bench. 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, that’s really important. There is no way 

a little group in Washington or somewhere can review everybody’s 

38 

search warrants. You’ve just got to train people in the local areas, 

and most metropolitan areas and mid-sized cities need somebody, 

would you all agree, that has expertise in these investigations. Mr. 

Weeks? 

Mr. WEEKS. Senator, I have often thought that if a police department doesn’t know what to do with a hard drive, they don’t know 

how to investigate child sexual abuse these days. I absolutely agree 

with you. 

Senator SESSIONS. All right. Well, I’m proud of the forensic center that they put up and they developed at Hoover. Mr. Hillman 

really was the driving force in the State District Attorneys, which 

is a little unusual, you know, Senator Biden. 

Chairman BIDEN. Not in Alabama. You and Hal Heflin get everything down there. 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, no. I mean, they’ve got private investment, they’ve got the— 

Chairman BIDEN. I know. I think it’s a great— 

Senator SESSIONS. And they’ve asked us for some help. But what 

I liked about it was, this was—on their own they came up with this 

conception of training people and it just drives home that, in modern-day investigations, even financial investigations and a lot of 

other crimes, but particularly child pornography, you have got to 

understand how the computer works, what he law is with regard 

to search warrants, how to access it, and how to present that evidence in court so a jury can understand what is happening and feel 

comfortable finding the person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I 

am sure that is not easy to do. 

Thank you. I like this panel. I think it’s valuable. I’m actually 

getting a little encouraged that maybe there are some things we 

can do to go after this group, this small but very damaging group 

that’s causing this kind of problem. 

Chairman BIDEN. Well, thank you, Senator. I do thank the panel. 

I can assure you, this is only the first in a series of hearings we 

are going to be having on this. My experience, again, is you’ve got 

to keep banging at this. You just can’t have a hearing and walk 

away from it. 

I want to—not for the record now, but the National Center has 

been such a gigantic resources, as Mr. Calloway has been kind 

enough to say. I’ve been very proud. It’s one of the proudest 

achievements that I’ve been associated with. But what I want to 

do is, in another fora, talk with you all about one of the things that 

I and Mr. Cooney, having been the Minority Counsel for so long 

and become my personal friend over I don’t know how many years, 

knows that I really think, Senator, that the need for hard, not 

drives, but data, the need for scientific studies relating to some of 

the questions we had. I wanted to talk with the National Center. 

It’s been a repository of a lot of this Federal money to help us do 

that very successfully. 

I think we have to bring in the National Science Foundation, I 

think we have to bring in some experts who are the leading psychiatrists and psychologists in the world, I think we have to bring in 

and begin to accumulate a body of academic—not weight, but while 

we are moving forward—studies in your chosen profession, Ms. Collins, from psychologists, psychiatrists, and criminologists so that 

39 

we have a better sense of a number of the questions that have been 

raised here. 

This has really been, in a sense, a bootstrap operation. I mean, 

locally, whether it’s what you’re doing, Randy, down in Alabama, 

or what—look what we’re talking about. We’re talking about a 

State with a population smaller than Delaware, Wyoming, having 

an investigator who’s put together a program that the whole country is looking at. So what I don’t want to do is get at cross purposes 

with my friends at the National Center, so I’m going to need your 

advice. 

If you were able to, any one of you, have a pen up here to write 

the laws, what additional information—I’m not asking you now— 

and sources of information would you be seeking? What other areas 

of expertise would you be trying to bring in to deal with this issue 

and identify the profile of these people beyond anecdotal and experiential evidence that you know from being in the field? So it’s not 

part of my legislation now, but I want to talk about that. 

I’d also like to tell you all, I’d like to talk about, and I’m really 

anxious to talk to my colleague here, how we can sort of walk and 

chew gum at the same time. We can have—for example, in our bill 

there’s over a billion dollars over 8 years, $60 million a year for 

these ICACs, to expand them. 

But I also think there needs to be a uniquely local component as 

well to be able to have a system whereby, like the COPS bill, where 

the local District Attorney, the local Attorney General can make an 

application based on a set of criteria that he or she needs, one or 

two investigative personnel who have been trained, have the money 

to train them, and then have, just like we did in the COPS bill, 

a standard by which they have to report back to main Justice in 

an office that they have investigated X, Y and Z and how they’ve 

done it. 

So, we need a protocol. I want to talk to you guys about that. 

That in no way diminishes the pride that the Senator, I, and others 

have in the legislation we’re introducing. But I think maybe we 

have to go beyond this as well. I mean, I’m anxious to talk to you 

all about that. 

I’d like to introduce for the record, now, support letters for S. 

1738 from the National Sheriffs, the National Association of Police 

Organizations, Miami-Dade, International Union of Police Associations, Go-Daddy.com, United States Internet Service Provider Association, and statements from three of our colleagues, both the Senators from California and the Senator from Vermont and chairman 

of the full Committee, Senator Leahy, as well as two articles by 

Woody Kotch of USA Today that I think are pretty explanatory for 

the public at large. 

I would conclude by saying that one of the things I was impressed with, and I know you are, Senator, but I really am impressed with local law enforcement when you give them the tools 

and you give them some help. I was saying to my trainer today in 

my conference room, I said, you know, I can how in Delaware, how 

in Wyoming, and how in Montana, in relatively small States where 

there are not nearly as many dots, that we could have the resources to get a handle on it. 

40 

But in the big States like Florida, Pennsylvania, Texas, New 

York, et cetera, it must be so much harder. He said, Florida is 

doing a remarkable job. Florida has—and it’s one of the things I’m 

going to want to hold a hearing on as well—almost totally, locally, 

breaking down the State in a way that their local prosecutors are 

coordinating with one another, had made some really, really significant progress in this area. 

What is Florida, the fourth-largest State in the Union? I don’t 

know what it is. I don’t want to insult it by making it higher or 

lower than it is. But there’s well over 10 million people there. So, 

that is the next piece I want to explore with you all. You’ve been 

incredibly generous with your time. 

And as my mom—who is probably watching this hearing. She 

watches everything. She’s 90 years old and lives with me, and as 

she would say, she’s sharp as a tack—would say, you’re all doing 

God’s work here. This is really, really important stuff. To paraphrase old Hubert Humphrey, who I had the honor to serve with, 

he said, the measure of the civility of a society is how well they 

treat the youngest among us and the oldest among us. I mean, 

God, if we can’t do better and learn with what is now, as you said 

sir—you can put it up on the screen, you can quantify it. You don’t 

need a search warrant. You can quantify just how heinous and how 

frequent and how widespread this is. 

So I thank you all very, very much. I count on your willingness 

to continue to help and educate the Committee, and I mean educate it. I mean in the literal sense, it’s been an education for me 

today. I promise you we will stay with this. 

With that, again, thank you, particularly those who have made 

the longest travel to get here. Lieutenant, you can ride home on the 

Metro with me. 

[Laughter.] 

Thank you all very much. We are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:41 p.m. the Committee was adjourned.] 

[Questions and answers and submissions for the record follow.] 

41 


44986.001
42 


44986.002
43 


44986.003
44 


44986.004
45 


44986.005
46 


44986.006
47 


44986.007
48 


44986.008
49 


44986.009
50 


44986.010
51 


44986.011
52 


44986.012
53 


44986.013
54 


44986.014
55 


44986.015
56 


44986.016
57 


44986.017
58 


44986.018
59 


44986.019
60 


44986.020
61 


44986.021
62 


44986.022
63 


44986.023
64 


44986.024
65 


44986.025
66 


44986.026
67 


44986.027
68 


44986.028
69 


44986.029
70 


44986.030
71 


44986.031
72 


44986.032
73 


44986.033
74 


44986.034
75 


44986.035
76 


44986.036
77 


44986.037
78 


44986.038
79 


44986.039
80 


44986.040
81 


44986.041
82 


44986.042
83 


44986.043
84 


44986.044
85 


44986.045
86 


44986.046
87 


44986.047
88 


44986.048
89 


44986.049
90 


44986.050
91 


44986.051
92 


44986.052
93 


44986.053
94 


44986.054
95 


44986.055
96 


44986.056
97 


44986.057
98 


44986.058
99 


44986.059
100 


44986.060
101 


44986.061
102 


44986.062
103 


44986.063
104 


44986.064
105 


44986.065
106 


44986.066
107 


44986.067
108 


44986.068
109 


44986.069
110 


44986.070
111 


44986.071
112 


44986.072
113 


44986.073
114 


44986.074
115 


44986.075
116 


44986.076
117 


44986.077
118 


44986.078
119 


44986.079
120 


44986.080
121 


44986.081
122 


44986.082
123 


44986.083
124 


44986.084
125 


44986.085
126 


44986.086
127 


44986.087
128 


44986.088
129 


44986.089
130 


44986.090
131 


44986.091
132 


44986.092
133 


44986.093
134 


44986.094
135 


44986.095
136 


44986.096
137 


44986.097
138 


44986.098
139 


44986.099
140 


44986.100
141 


44986.101
142 


44986.102
143 


44986.103
144 


44986.104
145 


44986.105
146 


44986.106
147 


44986.107
148 

Æ 


44986.108