The term grooming (online solicitation) refers to the approach of a minor under the age of 15 with the intention of sexual exploitation. Online grooming may occur on all websites popular among adolescents and children, such as online games, social networks, chat services, and elsewhere. A significant proportion of children who use the internet are at some point approached by malicious users. Indicative of the risk children face are the findings of FORTH, according to which 21% of children report having experienced online harassment, with a large proportion attempting to deal with it without reporting it to anyone, while 21% of children have met in person someone they first met online.
Grooming – Legal Treatment of Online Solicitation
- a) the offence against sexual dignity in the digital environment (Article 337(3) of the Penal Code (PK)), which, in order to be established, requires that an adult come into contact with a minor under 15 years of age through the use of an electronic medium, with the precondition of mutual approach and a relationship of continuous communication (a meeting with the minor constitutes an aggravating circumstance);
- b) child pornography through information systems (Article 348A of the PK);
- c) pornographic performances involving minors (Article 348C of the PK), aimed at protecting actual minors with regard to their sexual development and self-determination;
- d) the offence against the modesty of minors online (Article 342 of the PK), aimed at combating paedophilia.
Grooming – Examples of Online Solicitation
- A perpetrator began chatting via an online messaging service (MSN Messenger) with an underage girl, aged 13. After succeeding in winning her trust, he persuaded her to send photographs of an erotic nature, which, having in his possession, he then used to threaten the underage girl whenever she did not comply with his wishes.
- Similar groomer behaviour is described in judgment 342/2016 of the Patras Misdemeanour Court, which describes in detail the psychological pressure exerted by the perpetrator so that the minor would send him further nude photographs, which he in fact stored so as to be able to revisit them whenever he wished.
- Judgment 161/2016 of the Mixed Jury Court (MOD) further illustrates the phenomenon of online solicitation of minors. According to the facts described therein, the 13-year-old victim met the 21-year-old perpetrator online and subsequently developed personal contact with him, meeting him and entering into a relationship with him, even following him to his home, where she stayed for 10 days.
- Finally, of relevance is the cassation judgment Areios Pagos 3/2018 against the acquittal judgment 130/2015 of the Katerini Mixed Jury Court (MOD), according to the facts of which the 13-year-old victim met the 20-year-old perpetrator through the Facebook application and entered into a romantic relationship with him. However, the Katerini Mixed Jury Court accepted that, in view of the physical and mental development of the victim, she was capable of giving consent.
- See also article Child Pornography
- See also article Defamation through Facebook
- See also article Online Fraud
- See also article Computer Fraud
- See also article Hacking
- See also Methods of Online Attacks
- See also article Malicious Software
- See also article Online Attacks
- See also article Online Piracy
- See also article Software Piracy
- See also article Trafficking in Pharmaceuticals
- See also article 10 Security Practices
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ON GROOMING – ONLINE SOLICITATION OF MINORS
1. What sentence do I face if charged with online solicitation?
The charges typically brought (Articles 337(3), 342, 348A and 348C of the Penal Code (PK)) carry sentences ranging from misdemeanour imprisonment to felony imprisonment, depending on the form of the act and any aggravating circumstances (a meeting with the minor, the sending or storage of material). A significant reduction may be achieved through the recognition of mitigating circumstances (Article 84 of the PK), such as a previous honest life, repentance, or good conduct after the act. In cases of lower sentences, suspension of execution (Article 99 of the PK), conversion into a monetary penalty (Article 80 of the PK), or community service may be considered. Individualised study of the case file determines the strategy.
2. How can I defend myself if I had no intention of sexual exploitation?
The subjective element (mens rea) of these offences requires specific intent, namely the purpose of sexually approaching a minor. The defence examines whether the defendant knew the victim’s age, whether there was continuous communication of a sexual nature, whether the victim’s profile presented features of an adult, and the totality of the conversations in their actual context. In judgment 130/2015 of the Katerini Mixed Jury Court (MOD), even an issue of consent was recognised on account of the victim’s development. Each case is judged on its facts, the digital evidence, and the psychological state of the defendant.
3. What do I do if I have been summoned for preliminary investigation or under flagrante delicto procedure?
From the very first moment a summons is issued by the police or by the Cybercrime Unit, the presence of a lawyer is required. The defendant has the right to remain silent and the right not to provide passwords or to unlock devices without the presence of counsel. The first defence statement is critical, as declarations are difficult to retract. In the event of seizure of electronic devices, the lawyer requests a copy of the report and monitors compliance with the procedures for examining digital data. Mishandling at the initial stage dramatically aggravates the case file.
4. Is there a chance of avoiding conviction altogether?
Yes, in a number of cases. The legality of the collection of digital evidence, the chain of custody of the data, any unauthorised access to accounts, the identification of the perpetrator beyond an IP address that may be used by third parties, and the authenticity of conversations (which may be altered with screenshots) are all examined. Issues of statute of limitations, formal defects in the case file, and the contesting of intent may lead to acquittal or discharge. The principle of in dubio pro reo operates in favour of the defendant where doubts remain as to crucial elements.
5. How long do the criminal proceedings in such cases last?
The total duration depends on the complexity of the case. The stage of preliminary investigation and forensic examination of devices typically lasts from several months to over a year. This is followed by the main investigation (where a felony is involved), referral by judicial council order, and trial in the courtroom. At felony level, the competent court is the Mixed Jury Court (MOD), while for misdemeanour-level acts it is the Three-Member Misdemeanour Court. In the event of conviction, there is a right of appeal, leading to a fresh hearing on the merits.
6. What is the role of the lawyer at your firm?
The Law Firm ZIAMPARAS D. & ASSOCIATES specialises in cybercrime and has handled cases involving offences in the digital environment. It undertakes the defence from the first stage, monitors the seizure and examination of devices, files memoranda, raises standalone pleas and mitigating circumstances, contests the legality of digital evidence, and prepares the closing argument before the court. At the same time, it ensures the psychological support of the defendant and his or her family, as well as the protection of the defendant’s personality from leaks during the course of the proceedings.