Colluding With Perpetrators? A Content Analysis of Judicial Explanations for Child Sexual Abuse Perpetration

ABSTRACT Documenting how judges explain child sexual abuse (CSA) perpetration is an important task as sentencing decisions are informed by their explanatory understandings. Despite this, the research into judges’ explanations for CSA perpetration is piecemeal and dated. Moreover, some of the extant scholarship does not differentiate judicial understandings of CSA specifically from sexual offending more broadly. In light of this, the research presented in this article involved a qualitative and quantitative content analysis of all relevant judicial transcripts relating to CSA in the state of Queensland, Australia, and published online between 1 January and 28 August 2025 ( n = 42). The study found three previously undocumented judicial narratives (cognitive impairment of perpetrators, pornography and misogyny). Despite the criticisms of prior scholars that judges’ explanations tend to condone perpetrators’ conduct, this was not found to be the case in the current study.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice
Published
2026-08-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/hojo.70061
Primary Topic
Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Colluding With Perpetrators? A Content Analysis of Judicial Explanations for Child Sexual Abuse Perpetration

Kelly Richards
The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice
Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
article

Colluding With Perpetrators? A Content Analysis of Judicial Explanations for Child Sexual Abuse Perpetration

Kelly Richards
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Documenting how judges explain child sexual abuse (CSA) perpetration is an important task as sentencing decisions are informed by their explanatory understandings. Despite this, the research into judges’ explanations for CSA perpetration is piecemeal and dated. Moreover, some of the extant scholarship does not differentiate judicial understandings of CSA specifically from sexual offending more broadly. In light of this, the research presented in this article involved a qualitative and quantitative content analysis of all relevant judicial transcripts relating to CSA in the state of Queensland, Australia, and published online between 1 January and 28 August 2025 ( n = 42). The study found three previously undocumented judicial narratives (cognitive impairment of perpetrators, pornography and misogyny). Despite the criticisms of prior scholars that judges’ explanations tend to condone perpetrators’ conduct, this was not found to be the case in the current study.

The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice
Queensland University of Technology (AU)
Queensland University of Technology
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.