Federal law requires criminals convicted of sexually exploiting children for money to pay their victims financial compensation. But that only happened in 6% of federal cases in North Texas. In fact, from 2015 to 2024, this region had the lowest rate of restitution orders among federal districts that had at least 100 child sex-trafficking cases.
Dallas Morning News journalists Kevin Krause and José Luis Adriano determined those dismal facts by combing through data from almost 24,000 federal child exploitation cases. Their investigation uncovered another disturbing figure from Texas state courts. Our colleagues couldn’t find a single state criminal case in Dallas in which the convicted sex trafficker was ordered to pay restitution to a victim. Not one.
That troubling trend must change.
Federal prosecutors are legally required to seek restitution from people convicted of trafficking children for sex or producing or possessing child pornography. The financial compensation is intended to punish criminals and help victims pay for things they need, like medical and psychological care, to assist them in establishing and maintaining stable, productive lives.
As this newspaper’s investigation shows, few survivors of child exploitation receive any compensation from their abuser. That’s because negotiating restitution can complicate plea deals. Or prosecutors may not believe the defendant has assets, or that law enforcement can find and seize those assets. Or the state may believe that a suspect’s prison sentence precludes them from ever earning wages from which they could pay their victim.
But those aren’t the only factors that prevent victims of child sexual exploitation from receiving the compensation to which they’re entitled. Many victims don’t know they have a right to it. They rarely have their own attorney or other advocate to represent their interests in court, and prosecutors do not press judges to order restitution.
Krause and Adriano also showed that prosecutors have little incentive to pursue restitution. When federal prosecutors seize criminal assets and sell them, the proceeds can go to law enforcement or to restitution for the victim, if there is a restitution order. Without an order, the government isn’t obligated to share the money with the victim. Advocates say each U.S. attorney’s office should be required to track and publicly report detailed information about restitution orders. We agree.
Other fixes are obvious. Prosecutors and judges should routinely request and order restitution in cases involving child sexual exploitation — and ask financial crime experts to help trace tainted assets that could be liquidated. Proceeds from forfeited assets should go first to support victims, then to law enforcement. Legal societies and anti-trafficking organizations could recruit and train attorneys to serve as pro bono advocates for survivors.
The internet’s anonymity and international reach have allowed child sexual exploitation to proliferate; cryptocurrency has made it easier for perpetrators to hide their crimes and their assets. Prosecutors need to use every tool available to help victims recover and make criminals pay.
Have thoughts about this?