Snapchat and Sex Crimes: What Utah Parents and Teens Should Know

← Back to Blog

This article is written for parents, teenagers, teachers, and coaches. It is not legal advice, and it is not written for any particular case. It is here because the pattern described below is now common enough in Utah that most families will encounter it or hear about it, and because almost every version of it starts the same way.

The purpose is to describe what the research actually shows about how Snapchat gets used in sexual offenses against minors, to correct the single most common misunderstanding about the app, and to say plainly what to do in the first hour if it happens.

What the Numbers Actually Show

Start with scale. In 2025 the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children received 21.3 million reports to its CyberTipline. Reports of online enticement, which NCMEC defines as an individual communicating online with someone believed to be a child with intent to commit a sexual offense or abduction, reached 1.4 million, a 158 percent increase over 2024. Roughly 80,000 of those were sextortion. NCMEC was receiving an average of 137 financial sextortion reports every day, up 37 percent from the year before.

Read that 158 percent increase carefully, because NCMEC itself does not present it as pure growth in offending. The federal REPORT Act took effect in 2024 and requires platforms to report online enticement and child sex trafficking the same way they already reported child sexual abuse material. Part of the jump is a new mandatory reporting category. The underlying problem is real either way, but the number is not a clean year over year comparison.

Utah is not outside the trend. As of mid December 2025, the Utah Attorney General's Office reported that its Internet Crimes Against Children task force had received more than 9,500 tips that year, up from about 6,800 in all of 2024, and had prosecuted 179 cases compared to 71 the year before.

Now the part that matters for this article. Snapchat is not the app where most of this starts, and anyone who tells you it is has not read the data. It is the app where it moves.

Thorn, a nonprofit research organization, analyzed sextortion reports inside NCMEC's own CyberTipline data covering August 2020 through August 2023. Among reports that identified where the offender first made contact, Instagram accounted for 45.1 percent and Snapchat for 31.6 percent. But among reports that identified where the conversation was moved to afterward, Snapchat was first at 35.8 percent, ahead of Google messaging at 23.8 percent and WhatsApp at 14 percent.

A separate Thorn study, a survey of 1,200 young people ages 13 to 20 conducted in late 2024 and published in June 2025, measured something different but pointed the same direction. Among victims whose extortionist delivered threats through technology, Snapchat was the most frequently named individual platform at 37 percent, followed by Instagram at 24 percent, Facebook Messenger at 21 percent, and Discord at 18 percent. Ordinary text messaging was named slightly more often than Snapchat, at 39 percent, which is worth knowing: once someone has an image, the threats can arrive anywhere.

That is the finding to take home. Someone looking for images from a minor will often meet that minor somewhere public and then say, in one form or another, add me on Snap. There is a reason for that, and it is not an accident.

Why the Conversation Moves to Snapchat

Snapchat is where a very large share of American teenagers already are. Pew Research Center's survey of 1,458 U.S. teens ages 13 to 17, conducted September 25 to October 9, 2025, found that 55 percent use Snapchat and 46 percent use it daily. In Pew's reporting on that same survey, 57 percent of teen Snapchat users said they message people on the app every day. An adult who wants to talk to a fifteen year old privately does not have to talk them into installing anything.

Beyond reach, three design features make the app useful to someone with bad intentions.

Content that appears to vanish

The core promise of the app is that what you send goes away. For a teenager being pressured to send a photo, that promise is doing enormous work. It converts an irreversible decision into what feels like a temporary one. It is the single most effective argument a predator has, and the app makes it for him.

Friend suggestions

Snapchat recommends accounts to add. An adult account and a minor's account can be introduced to each other by the platform itself, without either one searching for the other. In its September 2024 lawsuit against Snap, the New Mexico Department of Justice alleged that the recommendation system and the disappearing-message design together enable adults to reach minors, and described an undercover decoy account for a fictional fourteen year old that was connected with accounts using overtly predatory names. Snap moved to dismiss, the court denied that motion in April 2025, and the case is pending. Nothing in the complaint has been proven. The allegations are included here because they describe the mechanism, not because a court has found them true.

It is the app parents do not read

A text thread can be scrolled. A Snapchat conversation, by design, cannot be scrolled back through by a parent the next morning. That is precisely why it is chosen.

The Disappearing Message Is the Most Dangerous Misunderstanding

Every teenager believes a Snap disappears. Every teenager is wrong about what that means, in the direction that hurts them.

What actually goes away is the copy on the two phones. What does not go away is everything else. The person on the other end can screenshot it, and while Snapchat notifies you of a screenshot, notification is not prevention. More commonly, the recipient simply photographs the screen with a second phone, which produces no notification at all. From the moment an image is opened, the person receiving it controls whether it survives, and you do not.

The same misunderstanding runs the other way, and this is the part almost nobody knows. Snap's own Law Enforcement Guide, updated July 1, 2025, states that Snap can disclose account information including current and previous usernames, email addresses, phone numbers, display names, account creation dates, and IP addresses tied to logins and account activity, and that logs containing metadata about a user's communications may be available. Stories are designed to delete after 24 hours, and a Snap is designed to delete once opened by all recipients, but Memories content can remain until the user deletes it.

The guide is equally clear about the limits. IP logs are retained only for a limited period, communications metadata may or may not be available, and Snap warns that user data is not typically retained for long, which is why it directs law enforcement to send a preservation request early rather than waiting for a warrant to issue.

How It Usually Happens

The pattern is consistent enough that describing it is worth more than any warning.

An account that appears to belong to a peer, often an attractive girl of about the same age, follows or messages a teenager on a public platform. The conversation is friendly and moves quickly to Snapchat. Within a short time it turns flirtatious, and the other account sends what appears to be an intimate image first, which makes reciprocating feel normal and safe rather than exceptional. The teenager sends something back.

The tone changes immediately. The account produces the image, often alongside a screenshot of the teenager's friends list or school, and demands money, gift cards, or more images. The demand is urgent and the deadline is short. In Thorn's 2025 survey, 17 percent of young people who had knowingly shared an image faced a threat within 24 hours, and 37 percent within a week. Where the contact had only ever been online, 29 percent were threatened within a day.

The victims are not who most parents picture. Thorn's analysis of CyberTipline reports found that among minor victims of financial sextortion whose age and gender were recorded, 90 percent were boys between 14 and 17. The FBI, in a national alert issued with its partners in December 2022, described more than 3,000 minor victims in a single year, more than 7,000 related reports, and more than a dozen suicides, and noted that a large share of these schemes are run from outside the United States.

Nothing about this requires the offender to be local, to be older than the victim, or to ever meet the victim. It is frequently a stranger on another continent running the same script on hundreds of children at once.

What Utah Calls These Offenses

Utah has specific statutes for this conduct, and the penalties are heavier than most people assume. This section is descriptive. It is not an assessment of anyone's case.

Sexual extortion

Under Utah Code section 76-5b-204, a person commits sexual extortion by communicating a threat, by any means, to distribute an intimate image of the victim, with the intent to coerce the victim into sexual conduct or into producing further images. Declining to delete an image after the victim asks can also qualify. For an adult, this is a third degree felony carrying a mandatory fine of at least $5,000, and the statute states the court may not waive or suspend that fine.

Aggravated sexual extortion

Under section 76-5b-204.1, the offense becomes aggravated when any of several circumstances is charged and found true, including that the victim is a child, meaning under 18. When the actor is an adult and the victim is a child, aggravated sexual extortion is a first degree felony with a mandatory fine of at least $20,000.

Enticing a minor

Under section 76-5-417, it is a crime to knowingly use an electronic communication or device to solicit, seduce, lure, or entice a minor, or a person the actor believes to be a minor, to engage in sexual activity that violates state law. Two features of that statute surprise people. The other person does not have to actually be a minor, only believed to be one. And the statute expressly provides that it is not a defense that a law enforcement officer or undercover operative was involved in detecting or investigating the offense.

Sexual exploitation of a minor

Under section 76-5b-201, knowingly possessing, viewing, or accessing child sexual abuse material with intent to view is a second degree felony. The statute treats it as a separate offense for each minor depicted and for each time the same minor appears in different material, which is how possession cases turn into charge counts in the dozens.

What to Do First

If your child tells you this is happening, the first hour matters more than the next month. Four things, in order.

Do not pay, and do not send anything else

The FBI's consistent guidance is that paying does not end it. It confirms the account is live and that the person on the other end will respond to pressure, and demands typically escalate. In Thorn's survey, among young people who had been sexually extorted, 18 percent sent additional images and 7 percent paid money. Compliance is not an exit.

Do not delete anything

This is the mistake almost every family makes, and it is understandable. The instinct is to purge the phone. Do not. The account name, the message history, the screenshots, the payment app requests, and the phone itself are the case. Take screenshots of everything, including the profile and the username, before blocking anyone. Blocking first and screenshotting second means the record is gone.

Report it

Report the account inside the app. Then report it outside the app, because platform reporting and law enforcement reporting are different things and only one of them results in an investigation. NCMEC's CyberTipline takes reports at report.cybertip.org or 1-800-843-5678. The FBI takes reports at ic3.gov. In Utah, the Attorney General's Internet Crimes Against Children task force takes tips directly, and your local police department can take a report as well.

If images of a minor are already circulating, NCMEC operates Take It Down, a free service that assigns a digital fingerprint to the image so participating platforms can detect and remove it, without the image ever leaving the child's device.

Tell your child, out loud, that they are not in trouble

Around one in seven victims in Thorn's survey, 16 percent, said they never disclosed the experience to anyone. The reason is nearly always shame and the fear of losing the phone. A child who believes the consequence of telling a parent is punishment will choose the extortionist over the parent, which is exactly what the extortionist is counting on. The sentence that matters is that they are not in trouble, that this is being done to them, and that it stops now.

The Conversation Worth Having Before Any of This

Monitoring software is not the answer here, and neither is taking the phone. Children who are being extorted are usually not caught by a filter, they are caught by having somewhere to go. Two sentences do more than any app setting.

If You Are Already in This

People end up on both sides of these cases. Some are families whose child was targeted and who now have police, a school, and a phone full of evidence to deal with. Some are people, including teenagers, who are being investigated over messages they sent. Both situations move quickly and both benefit from talking to a lawyer before talking to anyone else.

Jim Tily is a criminal defense attorney in Salt Lake City who also represents crime victims in Utah criminal cases. If any part of this has happened in your family, in either direction, call before you make decisions about the phone, the police report, or a school investigation.

This article is general public awareness information about publicly reported research and Utah statutes. It is not legal advice, it does not describe any client or case, and reading it does not create an attorney client relationship. Statutes change and every situation is different. Contact an attorney to discuss the specific facts of your situation.