You are not recommending any changes in Section 3010? Mr. HUGHES. All right. Have you read Congressman Tom Ridge's legislation by chance, H.R. 4257? Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir, we have. Mr. HUGHES. He testified here today. Mr. DAVIS. Yes, we have. Mr. HUGHES. Do you support that legislation? Mr. DAVIS. Not entirely-kind of concerned about it. Mr. HUGHES. What are your concerns about? Mr. DAVIS. The concept of making it against the law to send mail to someone who has not requested it is one that has not fared very well in the courts. The Supreme Court just, what, 3 of 4 years ago, in a case involving another Postal statute-it was a statute that said basically, you can't send unsolicited advertising for contracep tives through the mails to anyone who hasn't requested it. When we went out to enforce that statute, we were very quickly brought into court. The result of the litigation was a Supreme Court decision that basically says the right of citizens to receive mail freely is very deeply protected by the First Amendment, and that no statute which conditions the right to receive mail upon having first requested it is going to stand constitutional muster very easily-and they struck the statute. The Court in Treatman did the same thing with Section 3010 years ago. So we think the concept in this bill of making it unlawful to make that first mailing of sexually-oriented matter to someone who hasn't requested it is kind of risky. We don't like taking the risk when part of the price you pay for that is to repeal two stat utes that the courts have upheld. If you can keep the existing law until we see how the new one fares, that might make some sense. But to get rid of two approved and partially effective statutes for one that is a little shaky-it bothers us. Mr. HUGHES. I understand. In Congressman Ridge's testimony he alluded to some material which in fact he submitted for the record. Are you familiar with that material? I asked the staff to show that to you. [The material is available for review in the Crime Subcommittee office:] Mr. SWAGERTY. Mr. Chairman, you are talking about the one that starts off with $4.16? Mr. HUGHES. That's it. Are you familiar with that? Mr. SWAGERTY. Yes, we are familiar with it, and this company is under investigation at this time. Mr. HUGHES. Is that an ongoing investigation? Mr. SWAGERTY. That's correct, sir. Mr. HUGHES. All right, OK. I have some other questions but we are running out of time and I would like to submit them for the record, if I might. I wonder if you will work with us, perhaps, in trying to provide some material that is out in the marketplace today-we have seen some of it-to help us understand just what is out there, and shape the direction that we are going in crafting legislation. I think that would be helpful to the committee. We are going to convene a hearing and if need be, we will do it in Executive Session if in fact it's ongoing criminal investigations, so that we can get some idea of just what is in the marketplace, and what we have to deal with. I think we can better draft the statute that we want to create to deal with it if we know exactly what we are dealing with. Mr. SWAGERTY. Yes, sir. Mr. HUGHES. Can you help us do that? Mr. SWAGERTY. Yes, we will work with you on that. We will contact your staff. Mr. HUGHES. As I say, if we have to do it in Executive Session, we will do it that way. Thank you very much. You have been very helpful to us today and we congratulate you on the excellent work that you do in this area. Mr. SWAGERTY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. HUGHES. Thank you. Our final panel consists of Ms. Patrice Scully, Regional Counsel, United States Customs Service, I believe from Chicago, Illinois; and Mr. John Sullivan, the Director of Child Pornography and Protection Unit, United States Customs Service. Please come forward. Welcome, Ms. Scully and Mr. Sullivan. Why don't we begin with your testimony, Mr. Šullivan. Your statements have been submitted. We will be very happy to receive them in full in the record and we hope that you can perhaps summarize for us. TESTIMONY OF PATRICE SCULLY, ASSISTANT REGIONAL COUNSEL, U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE, CHICAGO, IL.; AND JOHN SULLIVAN, DIRECTOR, CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND PROTECTION UNIT, U.S. CUSTOMS SERVICE Mr. SULLIVAN. Yes, I can, Mr. Chairman. With your permission, I brought some graphic charts along that I would like to use, that I think might expedite some of the descriptions that I will be giving. Mr. HUGHES. All right. Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee: It is my pleasure to represent the Customs Service here today and explain some of the operational programs that we are involved in and how we are dealing with the issue of importation, child pornography into the United States, as well as our belief that some of that material may be produced in the United States and is en route out of the country as well. Methods of production of child pornography, we believe, stem from not only material produced abroad and foreign national children being abused-because child pornography is in fact nothing more than a pornographic documentation of a crime-we feel that the material that is also produced here in the United States in amateur fashion may in fact be leaving our shores being used in material as produced overseas, and returning to the United States again with illegal importation. [Graphs] Mr. SULLIVAN. The first graphic shown depicts arrows in both directions and depicts a scene where we have importations coming in from both foreign distributors, not necessarily just from Europe but virtually every country in the world as well as material that is produced here in the United States that may be outbound. The distribution cycle is a very difficult one but yet it's very simple, as the graph depicts. The foreign market feeds the domestic market and the domestic one feeds the foreign. We have very few cases to date that had depicted exact cases where amateur photography of child abuse here in the United States has gone to foreign production, but we have had a few limited cases. In turn, the foreign-produced material is entered into the United States illegally and that material is used more importantly for us. It is used to sexually exploit children here in the United States by breaking down their inhibitions. Their inhibitions, after an individual who is prone to child abuse-whether he has been clinically diagnosed as a pedophile or if he is a preferential or situational abuser-he will use that material and court the child, if you will, for extended periods of time before ultimately engaging, or even suggesting sexual activity. Our plan within the child pornography enforcement program in the U.S. Customs Service is to not only gather intelligence information and important investigative information about that cycle, but also to working with State and local agencies to try and prevent it. The Child Pornography and Protection Unit was formed on October 8, 1985 in direct response to an increasingly and alarmingly large rate of importation being discovered. In 1985, approximately 82,000 individuals' parcels were identi fied. That rate has declined. As I get into the briefing a little bit further, Mr. Chairman, we will show that we think there are reasons for that decline. The Child Pornography and Protection Unit is staffed and agents and analysts as well as establishing a network of agents across the United States and in our foreign offices to gather information about child pornography production and distribution throughout the world, not just in the United States. We feel that has a direct relationship to our statutory require ment to protect our shores because the material is not just a domestic industry and it is not just a foreign one. When we formed the Unit in 1985, the situation was to identify whether or not we indeed had a threat assessment and whether we had specific problems. What we did is we took eight of our more experienced investigators from around the country, and meeting with the Department of Justice as well as the Department of Treasury, held a roundtable to frankly discuss the problems that were encountered, and not only child pornography investigations but in child pornography prosecutions. Some of the problems are articulated here where we had no central clearinghouse for child pornography information or individuals who either engaged in the purchase of child pornography or who were engaged in the production and distribution of child porn. We have created a database within our Treasury enforcement communications system as well as set up our own separate database to deal with that issue in storing information so that material cannot only be collected but that we can use that intelligence information to establish the court requirements of predisposition to show that an individual is in fact predisposed and that we are not just picking names out of a telephone book to investigate. Investigative crossover between Customs and other enforcement agencies, both at the Federal and State and local level, was a problem, because prior to having any centralized collection or centralized oversight within Customs, an agent, for instance, in the northeastern part of the United States would have no knowledge of an individual who is under investigation, say, in the southwest part of the United States. We have solved that problem with the creation of the unit because now any case that is initiated is monitored through the Child Pornography and Protection Unit and the information is electronically stored. Unused information-in other words, bits and pieces of puzzles— that have come up during previous investigations, which go back as far as 5 or 10 years, were never stored. We now store that information. So that not only our agency but the agencies with whom we work-especially the Postal Inspection Service and the FBI—have access to that information through our channels so that we can share that information and collectively bring an individual to prosecution. Our primary targets in the past have been consumers, because much as in the same investigative technique is used in the drug war where we identify the ultimate consumer and then trace it back to the producer-we are doing the same thing in child pornography investigations. Child pornography investigations in the United States have increased since 1984, and in particular since 1985 when the unit was formed. We have approximately 730 investigations under way at this time involving child pornography importation. Mr. HUGHES. How many? Mr. SULLIVAN. Seven hundred and thirty. Another thing became apparent in the prosecution of child pornography investigations is that we did not have a reliable source of expert witnesses readily available to us that may be needed by not only a Federal jurisdiction but State and local as well. So what we have done is we have established a data bank of expert witnesses or an expert witness registry; so that we can identify those individuals who would be beneficial to the prosecution of child pornography cases, not just in law enforcement, but we have also worked closely with the American College of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology and the American Medical Association. Inadequate training was a problem that we have addressed, and we have completely rewritten the curriculum; and now child pornography investigation techniques are employed in every special agent basic training course within the Customs Service. Limited investigative resources have been a problem all along. We are increasing our commitment to child pornography enforce ment and we have increasingly been spending more and more manyears in the investigation of child porn. Mr. HUGHES. How many agents do you have detailed to the investigative unit? Mr. SULLIVAN. In the Unit in Washington, sir, we have five Special Agents, one Intelligence Analyst, and myself as the head of that Unit. In the field we have a network of 135 agents—a minimum of 135 agents stationed in each of our offices domestically-and no particular agent works this program full time. The reason for that is twofold-not only because of other staff demands but also because of the toxicity of this information and the material being continually exposed to child pornography, we feel may have some toxic effect upon the investigator. That is one of our concerns. Functions of the Child Pornography and Protection Unit are very simple and very straightforward. We service Customs and all Customs functions, and we integrate not only within the Office of Enforcement but also within the Office of Inspection and Control, which are our uniformed inspectors with the seaports and the airports. Because we have found increasing evidence that child pornography is not only being imported through the U.S., but it is also being imported through cargo shipments, household goods shipments, and the like coming into the United States. We also work with other agencies and other organizations. I emphasize organizations because we have not limited ourselves strictly to dealing with governmental law enforcement agencies. But be cause approximately 52 percent of all of our cases since 1984 have uncovered some form of child sexual exploitation, we feel there is a distinct need for close interaction with social service organizations which can benefit the child at risk. So what we have done is we have set up▬▬ Mr. HUGHES. Would you conclude your testimony, Mr. Sullivan, please. So. Mr. SULLIVAN. I'm sorry? Mr. HUGHES. Conclude your testimony in just another minute or Mr. SULLIVAN. OK, sir. Special projects such as what the Postal Inspection Service related to indeed are an ongoing effort by the Customs Service as wellthe previous testimony spoke of Operation Borderline, and we have engaged in other projects as well. These were some of the situations that we covered. In summary, the computerized databank is really the crux of our system. What we hope to do is by furnishing information into the unit, and that information can be exchanged not only with the private sector, if it is non-law enforcement-related material; if it is law enforcement-related material it will be provided to Federal, State and local agencies, other Customs facilities as well as foreign law enforcement. So that information gleaned from investigations here could be forwarded to foreign law enforcement for action |