Solicitation Of Minors Online Cases
🔒 Overview: Solicitation of Minors Online
✅ What Is It?
Solicitation of minors online generally refers to an adult attempting to entice, persuade, or coerce a minor (under 18) to engage in sexual activity or explicit communication, often via:
Social media platforms
Messaging apps
Gaming platforms
Chat rooms
🚨 Common Federal Charges
18 U.S.C. § 2422(b):
Attempting to entice or coerce a minor to engage in illegal sexual activity using the internet or other interstate communication.
18 U.S.C. § 1470:
Transmitting obscene material to a minor.
18 U.S.C. § 2251 & § 2252:
Production, receipt, or distribution of child pornography (often associated with solicitation).
State Laws:
States have their own solicitation and child enticement statutes, often with similar elements.
⚖️ Elements of Online Solicitation
To prove online solicitation, prosecutors must typically show:
The defendant knew or believed the person was a minor.
The defendant used interstate communication (e.g., internet).
There was intent to engage the minor in illegal sexual conduct.
In many cases, no physical meeting or actual child is required—an undercover officer posing as a minor suffices.
🧑⚖️ Real-World Cases: Solicitation of Minors Online
1. United States v. Chambers (2019)
Facts:
Chambers engaged in online chats with someone he believed to be a 13-year-old girl. He sent explicit messages and arranged a meeting for sexual activity. The "girl" was actually an undercover federal agent.
Charges:
18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) – Online enticement of a minor
Attempted coercion and enticement
Outcome:
Convicted after trial
Sentenced to 15 years in federal prison
Significance:
Demonstrated that intent and steps toward meeting were sufficient, even if no real child existed.
2. United States v. Turchik (2020)
Facts:
Turchik posed as a teenage boy on Snapchat and lured underage girls into sending sexually explicit images. He saved and distributed the images, and continued contact under threat of exposure (“sextortion”).
Charges:
Online solicitation
Receipt and distribution of child pornography
Coercion
Outcome:
Pled guilty
Sentenced to 25 years
Significance:
Illustrated the danger of online deception and how sextortion can trigger more severe penalties.
3. State v. Walton (Texas, 2018)
Facts:
Walton used an online dating app to arrange a meeting with someone he thought was a 14-year-old girl. He brought condoms and alcohol to the meeting spot, where he was arrested.
Charges:
Criminal solicitation of a minor
Attempted sexual assault of a child
Online solicitation under Texas Penal Code § 33.021
Outcome:
Convicted
Sentenced to 30 years in state prison
Significance:
Texas courts upheld the conviction despite no actual minor being involved, reinforcing the "fantasy defense" does not apply.
4. United States v. Lee (2017)
Facts:
Lee chatted with someone claiming to be a 12-year-old boy on a gaming platform. He requested nude images and sent explicit photos of himself.
Charges:
Online enticement
Transmission of obscene material to a minor (18 U.S.C. § 1470)
Outcome:
Convicted after trial
Sentenced to 20 years
Significance:
Use of gaming platforms to commit solicitation crimes shows how non-traditional channels are used and prosecuted.
5. United States v. Ramirez (2021)
Facts:
Ramirez communicated with a 15-year-old girl via Instagram, grooming her over weeks. He eventually met and engaged in sexual acts with her.
Charges:
Enticement of a minor
Sexual exploitation of a minor
Interstate travel for illicit sexual conduct
Outcome:
Pled guilty
Sentenced to 28 years
Significance:
This case combined online grooming with actual physical abuse, leading to more severe charges and sentencing enhancements.
6. United States v. Dawson (2022)
Facts:
Dawson, a high school teacher, used a fake Instagram account to solicit nude images from underage students. He created multiple aliases to reapproach victims who blocked him.
Charges:
Enticement of minors
Possession and production of child pornography
Use of a facility of interstate commerce to attempt enticement
Outcome:
Convicted
Sentenced to 35 years
Significance:
Demonstrated how multiple grooming attempts and abuse of authority can elevate the severity of prosecution.
⚖️ Key Legal Takeaways
| Legal Issue | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Intent is enough | A completed act is not required; attempted enticement can lead to full conviction. |
| Undercover stings are valid | Courts allow convictions even if no actual minor exists, as long as the defendant believed one did. |
| Fantasy defense rejected | Claiming the defendant "knew it wasn’t a real child" or "was just fantasizing" is rarely accepted. |
| Multi-count indictments | These often involve additional charges like pornography, obscenity, or exploitation. |
| Federal vs. State law | Both are used—often in coordination—to maximize penalties. |
RELATED Blog
0 comments