Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
02/02/2017 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB31 | |
| HB7 | |
| HB31 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 31 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 82 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 31-SEXUAL ASSAULT EXAMINATION KITS
3:06:24 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 31, "An Act requiring the Department of
Public Safety to develop a tracking system and collection and
processing protocol for sexual assault examination kits;
requiring law enforcement agencies to send sexual assault
examination kits for testing within 18 months after collection;
requiring an inventory and reports on untested sexual assault
examination kits; and providing for an effective date."
3:07:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked if rape kits from victims who choose
not to prosecute remain in the backlog and who owns the kits.
He added that his question relates to the issue of
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) evidence being tracked and made
available for use in the prosecution of a serial criminal.
3:08:43 PM
CELESTE NOVAK, Staff, Representative Tarr, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Tarr, prime sponsor of
HB 31, said that the rape kits, once received by the crime lab,
remain there in perpetuity. She stated that even if the victim
chooses not to pursue the case, the DNA evidence is kept on hand
should it needed in that case or in a serial assault case.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked if one of the reasons for a backlog
of unprocessed rape kits is that there is no immediately
pressing prosecution.
MS. NOVAK responded that is correct. She said the Department of
Public Safety (DPS) reported that the Scientific Crime Detection
Laboratory ("the crime lab") is currently able to keep up with
rape kit processing requests. She added that the fiscal note
reflects DPS's anticipation of an increase in kits submitted
should HB 31 become law.
3:10:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked about the current procedures for
handling rape kits. He asked if they are stored in the DPS
crime lab until they are ready to be processed; shipped out of
state to be processed and stored; or shipped out of state to be
processed then shipped back to the crime lab.
MS. NOVAK offered her understanding that the DPS crime lab is
processing the backlog of kits, and the kits are not going out
of state. She offered to provide the committee additional
information for clarification.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS mentioned the two different processes
described in the previous House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting of 01/31/17: one, using U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ) grant money to clear out the backlog; and the other,
ensuring a backlog doesn't accumulate in the future.
MS. NOVAK stated that outsourcing kits to out-of-state locations
is due to the type of processing required. Kits that are
processed at the crime lab in Alaska are kept at the lab in
perpetuity.
3:12:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if the backlog of unprocessed kits
was due to other reasons and "not just because they can't get to
them."
MS. NOVAK offered her understanding that there is no backlog,
because DPS caught up with the processing of all kits, after
receiving grant funds from DOJ.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON referred to a February 1 article from the
Alaska Public Media, which says that at the end of 2016, there
were 59 more rape kits to process. She asked for the make-up of
those kits.
MS. NOVAK responded that the crime lab has 102 kits on hand,
with 35 currently being processed. Of the 102 kits yet
unprocessed, 2 are from October, 25 from November, 34 from
December, and 41 from January [2017]. She added that DPS has
indicated it is able to maintain progress with those kits.
3:14:52 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 3:15 p.m. to 3:22 p.m.
3:21:31 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 31 will be set aside.
[HB 31 was brought before the committee again following the
hearing on HB 7.]
HB 31-SEXUAL ASSAULT EXAMINATION KITS
4:14:04 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that as the final order of
business, the committee would once again consider HB 31, "An Act
requiring the Department of Public Safety to develop a tracking
system and collection and processing protocol for sexual assault
examination kits; requiring law enforcement agencies to send
sexual assault examination kits for testing within 18 months
after collection; requiring an inventory and reports on untested
sexual assault examination kits; and providing for an effective
date."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked how DNA, as evidence, is stored, if
there is no related prosecution.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor
of HB 31, expressed her understanding that collected evidence is
the property of law enforcement until such time a crime is
resolved. She mentioned that property that is confiscated
during an arrest would be returned if the case was resolved
favorably for the arrested individual. She recommended
consulting with the Alaska Police Standards Council (APSC) to
ensure her information is accurate.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON expressed her concern for privacy. She
offered her understanding that once evidence is collected, it is
under the control of the law enforcement agency that is
investigating the incident, and sexual assault kits are treated
as evidence and are in the physical custody of the law
enforcement agency. She described a hypothetical situation in
which [a rape] happens and a rape kit is collected, but either
the charges are dropped or no one is charged. In that scenario,
she said, evidence has been collected, but "no crime's been
committed." She observed that the fiscal note reflects the cost
of storing the DNA evidence and tracking it. Representative
Johnson stated that while she supports catching criminals and
prosecuting them to the full extent of the law, she has concern
for the those whose DNA is being kept when they have never been
charged with a crime.
4:18:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR related two different scenarios. One
involves an individual who is sexually assaulted, a rape kit is
collected, but because it was a known perpetrator, the kit was
not processed. She asserted that even if the perpetrator was
known to that victim, law enforcement has learned that sometimes
the perpetrator has been involved in other crimes, and the
sexual assault incident should not be thought of as an isolated
case. She added that from law enforcement's perspective, that
evidence is very valuable. She cited that this scenario
demonstrates the challenge of balancing needs, and law
enforcement has chosen the public safety need over the privacy
need of the perpetrator. She asserted that in this scenario,
charges would be pressed, but the kit would not be essential for
the prosecution to make a case.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR related a circumstance where the victim
chooses not to press charges against the perpetrator and that,
she conjectured, was the basis of Representative Johnson's
concern. She queried, "Does a person have a right for that
evidence to not be used in a way that would incriminate them in
another crime if they weren't pressing charges for this crime?"
She stated her understanding that this question has been
resolved in favor of the public safety need being the first
priority.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON stated her concern for a fiscal note
solely for the purpose of tracking rape kits, and not for
catching up with a rape kit backlog or for bringing justice to
victims. She stated, "We have to be aware that ... this isn't
something that's going to make it more likely that someone is
going to have justice; in this case, ... personal information's
going to be tracked."
REPRESENTATIVE TARR responded that because there is currently no
tracking, it is impossible to know where a kit is in the process
and who is in possession of the kit. She opined that the
greatest value of the tracking system is ensuring a kit is not
lost in the process. She cited the challenges of rural
communities in collecting and handling evidence: a community
may not have a Village Public Safety Officer (VPSO); a trooper
must come from out of town; and there are time limits on the
viability of biological evidence. She conceded that these
circumstances are somewhat unique to Alaska because of geography
and limited access between communities, but she asserted that
the tracking system would facilitate identifying these problems.
She stated she shared the concerns that people have regarding
personal information in a database and the potential for it to
be used to harm an individual.
4:25:14 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS stated that HB 31 will be held over.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH paraphrased information provided to the
committee by Representative Tarr and said, "Internal review
indicates that there are kits that were never submitted to the
lab and go back as far as the mid-'80s." He asked how many kits
are in the backlog.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR responded that the audit revealed a backlog
of 3,600 unprocessed rape kits. She added that these kits are
the ones that have not been sent to the crime lab. She said
that the other numbers [102 kits yet unprocessed, 2 from
October, 25 from November, 34 from December, and 41 from January
2017] reflect the kits that have been sent to the crime lab and
the status of those kits. She pointed out that the
discrepancies between the numbers demonstrate the need for
tracking both the chain of [custody] and the life cycle of each
kit. She said currently the only information known about a kit
is when it was received and "where it's at in processing." She
mentioned that the 3,600 unprocessed rape kits are of most
concern to the public - where they are and why they have been
languishing. She reiterated the importance of processing rape
kits in order to discover perpetrators in other crimes; she
referred to the article on Clifford Lee [in the committee
packet], which demonstrates the importance of the DNA evidence
that linked him to prior assaults.
4:28:50 PM
KEELEY OLSON, Executive Director, Standing Together Against Rape
(STAR), brought up the possibility of a victim submitting to a
forensic examination without giving consent to open an
investigation. She said the report, in that instance, is called
a non-investigative report. In Anchorage it is referred to as
an anonymous victim report. She said that these victims are not
giving consent for the rape kits to be tested but may choose to
do so at any time. She asserted that this practice provides
more options for someone who is nervous about reporting. She
attested that this mechanism of reporting is a requirement of
the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) [of 1994]. She stated
STAR is very concerned about these anonymous kits being tested
without the victim's consent.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH pointed out that in a comment made earlier,
once the sample is taken, it is in law enforcement control and
can be used "down the road." He stated, "It is an open question
for me."
MS. OLSON responded that Representative Tarr has expressed she
is open to drafting policy to ensure that anonymous kits, for
which there is no consent for investigation, are isolated.
4:32:07 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS closed public testimony on HB 31.
[HB 31 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB082 Sponsor Statement 2.1.2017.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| Hb082 Supporting Documents FAQs 2.1.2017.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB082 Sectional Analysis 2.1.2017.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB082 ver A 2.1.2017.PDF |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB082 Supporting Document Letters 2.1.2017.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB082 Supporting Document Community List 2-1-2076.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 082 Fiscal Note 1.28.17.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 082 Draft Proposed Amendment ver A.1 2.1.17.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB007 Draft Proposed Amendment ver A.2 2.2.17.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 7 |
| HB082 Powerpoint Presentation.pdf |
HSTA 2/2/2017 3:00:00 PM |
HB 82 |