Online sexual grooming of children causes untold psychological harm, but can it be viewed as a crime of violence? In a ruling that broke new legal ground, the Upper Tribunal (UT) has authoritatively answered that question in the context of the criminal injuries compensation regime.
The case involved a man who was aged 12 when he was ‘befriended’ in an internet chatroom by a prolific paedophile who facilitated his access to adult content and persuaded him to perform sexual acts to camera. He suffered psychological damage as a result. The offender was currently serving a 12-year prison sentence in America for similar crimes against some 200 children.
The victim applied for a financial award under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. In rejecting his application, however, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) cited the restrictive terms of the Scheme, which only permit compensation to be paid to those whose criminal injuries are directly attributable to their being a direct victim of a crime of violence.
In upholding the victim’s challenge to that decision, the First-tier Tribunal noted that the English dictionary definition of violence is not confined to physical contact. Observing that coercion and control can be exerted in the physical presence of a victim or via electronic communication, it described the coercive conduct of the offender as a hostile act, subjugating the victim’s free will.
Ruling on CICA’s appeal against that outcome, the UT acknowledged that criminal conduct online or via text messaging may have a devastating impact on the lives of those affected, both during and after the events concerned. However, it noted that the offender’s conduct did not involve touching and did not amount to a sexual assault.
In allowing the appeal, the UT adopted a prescriptive interpretation of the Scheme and ruled that victims of online grooming may only claim for psychological injuries under the Scheme if they have been put in fear of unlawful and immediate violence by the perpetrator. The UT reached the same conclusion in another case that raised the same central issue of law.
The UT acknowledged that such an approach to the Scheme rendered it perhaps unlikely that compensation claims by victims of online grooming would succeed. However, to interpret the Scheme otherwise would amount to a judicial attempt to legislate. All should condemn the offender’s conduct, but its inclusion within the ambit of the Scheme was a matter for Parliament, not the courts.