The policing of Internet sex offences: pluralised governance versus hierarchies of standing

This article considers the dominant structure and patterns of policing as related to Internet-based sex offences. It is argued that the policing of Internet sex offences occupies an anomalous position, as compared to other forms of online offending. One the one hand, the policing of Internet sex off...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Policing & society 2013-12, Vol.23 (4), p.482-497
Main Author: Yar, Majid
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Crime
Crime prevention
Cybercrime
Governance
Government Agencies
hierarchies of standing
Hierarchy
Internet
Internet crime
Investigations (Law Enforcement)
Law enforcement
Motivation
pluralisation
Policing
privatisation
Privatization
Sex crime
sex offences
Sex Offenders
Social networks
Victims
Vulnerability
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This article considers the dominant structure and patterns of policing as related to Internet-based sex offences. It is argued that the policing of Internet sex offences occupies an anomalous position, as compared to other forms of online offending. One the one hand, the policing of Internet sex offences partakes of a wider trend towards the dispersed and pluralised governance of crime, a trend that is in many ways typified by responses to Internet crime. One the other hand, Internet sex offences are policed in ways at odds with responses to other forms of online offending - most especially in the extent of time, attention and resources directed to such offences by state-centred agencies. The state-centric response to such offences can be understood by appreciating their position within a 'hierarchy of standing' amongst and between Internet crimes. 'Hierarchies of standing' define offences differently according to their perceived seriousness and urgency, drawing upon collective judgements about the vulnerability of victims, the dangerousness of offenders, levels of risk and extent of harm caused. Public, political, media and expert assessments of sex offences serve to place them at the apex of the 'hierarchy of standing', and as such drive expectations that they will be subject to urgent and concerted action by state agencies, rather than being delegated to the responsibility of non-state actors.
ISSN:1043-9463
1477-2728
DOI:10.1080/10439463.2013.780226