A review of empirical studies of offenders-particularly sex offenders, and more particularly those who offend against children-demonstrates that denial of offenses and minimization of offending behavior are quite common at every stage of the criminal justice process. This is true during police interviews, during pretrial and presentencing mental health evaluations, among incarcerated offenders, among offenders seeking treatment, among offenders facing parole review, and among offenders already released into the community. This review highlights gaps in the research literature arising from inconsistencies in the definitions and measurement of denial and minimization, from the stage of adjudication or treatment at which measurements are made, and from the use of polygraphy to increase disclosures. Despite these limitations on the generalizability of empirical findings, it appears beyond dispute that many sex offenders maintain their innocence in the face of evidence to the contrary or even criminal conviction, and that many are able to recite additional crimes they have committed when they believe it is in their self-interest to do so.