1. Victim Selection:  Specific characteristics that make some children more vulnerable to abuse and less likely to report.  Age, disabilities, family problems, and/or personality characteristics may impact whether a child will resist or disclose abuse.
2. Engagement:  Children report that they are most often abused by someone with whom they have a relationship, or because the perpetrator cultivated a relationship with them or their caretakers.  Children report that perpetrators establish a special relationship through complements, gifts, or assistance to family members.  Children also report that perpetrators establish a controlling relationship and intimidate them through emotional or physical abuse.  
3. Grooming:  Children report that perpetrators introduce them to physical contact and sexuality.  Physical contact, such as horseplay, lap-sitting, or snuggling, can make children feel special and further reinforce the bond they feel with perpetrators.   Intrusive behavior-such as intruding on the child’s personal space-can be intimidating.  Introducing sexuality through conversations or pornography can also intimidate children, or contribute to a sense of shared responsibility for the abuse.
4. Assault:  Hands-on sexual contact with the child victim.  Often the first assault can occur during horseplay or tickling, and the child victim may misinterpret the sexual contact as an accident.
5. Concealment:  Children report that perpetrators discourage them from reporting the abuse through manipulation or threats.

Areas of Inquiry and Summary for Expert Testimony and Supporting Research Citations

BOTTOM LINE:

• Dr. Dutton relies on eight studies for her testimony. Seven of these are specifically based on interviews with offenders. Even the eighth study (Berliner) states it is “The companion study to this one, in which offenders in treatment were interviewed,” (p. 38).  
• Dutton identifies three books she relies upon for her testimony. Books are not peer reviewed studies. Two of the books (Pryor and Salter) are based solely upon interviews with perpetrators. The third (Hindman) is a therapy book written by an unlicensed child advocate with no identified college education.  
• Only one study has “process of victimization” in its title – Berliner (reviewed below). Regarding their interviews of 23 children, the authors state, “The sample was by no means representative of all victimized children and their experience.” Dr. Dutton’s five elements in her (Perpetrators’) “Process of Victimization” are only vaguely related to the three processes identified in this study.
• This study is literally the only research study ever published that uses the term “process of victimization” in its title. Where exactly did Dr. Dutton find a study that had the five elements that she describes?
• Dutton’s “Process of Victimization” is more properly described as “Perpetrators’ Process of Victimization” based on all eight of the studies and two of the books she relies upon. Is this profiling testimony?  See THE STATE OF ARIZONA v. GARY E. STARKS, No. 2 CA-CR 2019-0288, ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO, May 27, 2021.

The Studies

Highlights of this study:

• The entire sample was 23 children aged 10 to 18 years of age who had been in therapy for their abuse.  “The sample was by no means representative of all victimized children and their experience.” (p. 30)
• The offenders were limited to fathers, mothers’ boyfriend, neighbors, and babysitters. Does this small study generalize to grandfathers, stepfathers, etc.? (p. 30)
• “Almost half the sample had already been victimized by more than one person (9 by 2 offenders); 1 by 3 offenders; and 1 by 5 different offenders). There was no single pattern or kind of sexual abuse victimization. Even within a group of ongoing molestation situations, there was a startling variety of relationships.” (p. 31)
• “The children described ambivalent feelings for the offender. The majority (n = 14) described the relationship as positive; others described it as neutral (n = 6) or negative (n = 3). They reported a range of emotions. Over half said that they loved him, liked him, needed or depended on him. Almost half of the children also endorsed the statement, “I hated him.” Some had known the offender their whole lives (n = 7). For the others, the length of time they knew the offender before the abuse ranged from 5 to 10 years (n = 4); 1 to 4 years (n = 6); to 6 months or less (n = 6).” (p. 32)”
• “Pre-abuse indicators. Many of the children described the offender as doing or saying things before the molestation began which caused them to feel that the offender was thinking of them in a sexual way. (We had no way of checking the accuracy of children’s reports that before sexual abuse they recognized that certain things the offender did or said were indicative of sexual abuse. It may well be that children can identify these events as “‘warning signs” only after the sexual abuse has taken place. Certainly, for some of the children the abuse began before they knew what was being done to them was sexual or that it was not an appropriate thing for adults to do with children. These children may have no idea what the adult’s behavior was leading to. Other children may experience an uneasy feeling or discomfort, perhaps picked up from the offender’s anxiety or from some sense that things were not right, which comes to be a warning sign because it is often paired with sexual abuse.” (p. 33)
• “Half of the children said they were not permitted to do things that other kids did or were questioned or accused about sexual activities with peers. About half described being treated more favorably or being given money or clothes. The majority agreed that the offender did not respect privacy, engaged in a lot of physical contact, and would touch them in their sexual parts or expose themselves, ostensibly accidentally.” (p. 34)
• “The children confirmed that in most cases offenders made statements about the sexual activity to justify it.” (p. 34)
• “Almost all of the children reported some type of coercion either to gain cooperation or to prevent reporting.” (p. 34)
• “Three different but overlapping processes can be identified: sexualization of the relationship, justification of the sexual contact, and maintenance of the child’s cooperation.” (p. 37)
• “The sexualization of the relationship most often appears to take place gradually.” (p. 37)
• “Most of the offenders were reported to have made statements to rationalize or justify the behavior.” (p. 37)
• “A third aspect of the victimization process is the way offenders find to engage the children in sexual relationships, keep them involved, and prevent them from telling. Sometimes it is through threats and intimidation. Far more often they seem to have an instinct for discovering a particular child’s vulnerability and exploiting it toward the end of controlling the child, thus obviating the need to use more overt forms of coercion.” (pp. 37-38)
• “The companion study to this one, in which offenders in treatment were interviewed, provides overwhelming evidence that they are fully aware of the process they employ (Conte et al., 1989). They report targeting children for victimization, systematically conditioning them to accept increasing sexual physical contact, and exploiting the children’s needs in order to maintain them as available victims.” (p. 38)

LE Budin, CF Johnson 

Conte, J., Wolf, S., & Smith, T. (1989).  

Elliot, M., Browne, K., & Kilcoyne, J. (1995).  

Hindman, J. (1989). 

Leclerc, B. Proulx, J., & McKibben, A. (2005).  

Pryor, D.W. (1996). 

Salter, A.C. (2003).  

Underwood, R., Patch, P., Cappelletty, G., & Wolfe, R. (1999). 

Ward, T., Louden, K., Hudson, S.M. & Marshall, W.L. (1995).