{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02188782489740082, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.333333333333333, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
To know or not to know: Should crimes regarding photographs of their child sexual abuse be disclosed to now-adult, unknowing victims?

This paper considers the unexplored question of whether unaware crime victims have rights or interests in knowing and not knowing information pertaining to the crime(s) committed against them. Our specific focus is on whether crimes regarding abusive images should be disclosed to the now-adult victims of child sexual abuse who feature in them. Because these issues have not been addressed in the victimology or criminological literature, we utilise literature in another discipline – healthcare ethics and law – to inform our analysis. Through engaging with the debate on the right to know and not to know information concerning one’s genetic status, we develop a conceptualisation of the issues regarding unknowing abusive image victims. A rights-based conceptualisation proves to be largely inappropriate; we contend that, instead, it would be more productive to look to unknowing abusive image victims’ interests. We argue that the interests at stake are grounded in autonomy and/or spatial privacy, and that to find a way to resolve the disclosure dilemma, these interests must be considered alongside consequentialist concerns; disclosing information regarding abusive images could empower now-adult victims but could well cause them (further) harm. Finally, we consider the implications of our analysis for victimology.