Caveat – Most of the officers and Crown prosecutors we’ve worked with or know are deeply committed to apprehending those who exploit children, particularly in sextortion cases. Unfortunately, the legal framework surrounding investigations and evidence collection often presents significant challenges to these types of investigations. As with any profession, there are a few officers who may be hesitant to dedicate the time and effort required for in-depth investigations. However, the vast majority of officers, who are willing to go above and beyond, face enormous and frustrating investigative hurdles, as you will now read. This article isn’t about making excuses; instead, it’s meant to help parents, caregivers, and educators understand the uphill battle law enforcement faces when investigating these types of cases—challenges that the general public often isn’t aware of. The investigation of sextortion cases in Canada is far more complex and time-consuming than the public might imagine, particularly when compared to the fast-paced, fictionalized portrayals of cybercrime-solving seen on TV shows like CSI that so many of us have watched.  In reality, sextortion investigations require a coordinated effort involving multiple legal, technical, and resource-related challenges. Investigations often take months or even years, especially when the offender operates across international borders or employs sophisticated digital tools to hide their identity. These investigations are hampered by numerous factors, including evolving legal standards for evidence collection, the need for international cooperation, difficulties in tracking digital fingerprints, and the ever-present issue of limited police resources. One of the first and most significant challenges that Canadian police face when investigating sextortion cases is the legal framework governing how digital evidence is collected and presented in court. Once a sextortion case is reported, investigators must adhere to a strict investigative legal framework dictated by case law and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, especially regarding privacy rights- yes, an offender has privacy rights under our Charter here in Canada. In the past, law enforcement officers could often retrieve evidence directly from a victim’s phone or other digital devices with their consent. However, recent judicial decisions have shifted this practice, requiring officers to obtain a warrant before they can access and search the victim’s device for evidence. This change reflects the growing importance of digital privacy in the eyes of the courts, which in turn places a heavy burden on law enforcement investigations. Investigators must now meet stringent legal standards to secure production orders and search warrants, which adds time and complexity to the process. The need to balance privacy rights with effective policing means that cases can drag on longer than they might have in the recent past. (1)(2)(3)(4) Note – These cases have sparked substantial debate within the legal community, with some arguing that these rulings apply in certain situations but not in others. However, it’s unlikely that the police or Crown would want to risk losing a significant case at trial, after investing significant amounts of time and financial resources, simply because they failed to obtain a production order or warrant. Therefore, the best practice is now to secure judicial authorization in all cases where digital data is needed, regardless of the device, the individual involved, or the circumstances. Obtaining a search warrant is just the first step. Once digital evidence is collected, it must be carefully preserved and analyzed, and all actions must be in full compliance with the legal rules of evidence. This process can take weeks or even months, depending on the complexity of the case and the backlog of requests for digital forensic analysis that are needed on cellphones and computers, which many police agencies face due to a lack of resources. After securing access to the victim’s device, the next major hurdle is identifying the offender, especially in cases where the sextortionist is unknown. This often requires law enforcement to work with technology companies and social media platforms to obtain critical data needed as evidence, such as user activity logs, IP addresses, and communications between the victim and offender. However, obtaining this information is not as simple as it might seem. First, the investigative team typically needs to serve a production order or search warrant to these companies. If the data is stored outside of Canada – often the case with many social media platforms – officers are now required to apply for a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) through the RCMP in Ottawa to seek assistance from foreign law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI or Homeland Security in the United States or other foreign countries. This bureaucratic process is slow and can take weeks, if not months, to obtain the necessary cooperation. Even with the proper legal documentation, law enforcement faces further challenges, as tech companies may not always comply with Canadian warrants – remember, a Canadian court order has no legal weight outside of Canada, thus why an MLAT is required. Some platforms will cooperate with Canadian authorities, while others, due to differing international laws or their internal policies, may refuse to hand over the requested data.  Data retention policies also vary widely among platforms. By the time law enforcement has jumped through all the legal hoops to obtain a production order,  warrant, or MLAT the data they need might already have been deleted. This is especially problematic for platforms like Snapchat or Telegram, which either auto-delete messages after a certain period of time or employ end-to-end encryption, making it nearly impossible for investigators to retrieve evidence, even with legal authorization. One of the most daunting challenges in sextortion cases is identifying the suspect’s real-world location. Many sextortion schemes are run by organized crime groups operating internationally, which adds another layer of difficulty for Canadian police. These criminals often exploit technological tools like multiple Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) to disguise their true location, making it difficult for investigators to trace their digital fingerprint back to a physical address and the offender. VPNs allow the offender to mask their IP address, routing their internet activity through multiple servers in different countries. This not only makes it harder to … Continue reading The Challenges Faced by Canadian Law Enforcement When Investigating Sextortion Cases – Police Are Frustrated Too! What Parents Need To Know