Legislature(2009 - 2010)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/26/2010 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB52 | |
| HB235 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 52 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 235 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 52
"An Act authorizing psychological counseling for
jurors serving in criminal trials who are traumatized
by graphic evidence or testimony."
Co-Chair Hawker discussed housekeeping.
1:41:41 PM
Representative Beth Kerttula presented a brief overview of
the legislation. The bill would allow the court system to
offer juror counseling for particularly difficult cases.
DOUG WOLLIVER, ADMINISTRATIVE ATTORNEY, ALASKA COURT
SYSTEM, discussed the$15,000 fiscal note. He explained that
during the process to approximate the fiscal note, he
solicited judges, asking them how often they believed that
juror counseling would be needed. Most judges offered that
they rarely saw cases where juror counseling would be
necessary, but all the judges relayed that they
occasionally heard traumatic cases. Several judges had
revealed that they had entered the jury room after
deliberation and found jurors who were inconsolable.
Co-Chair Hawker submitted that it was not possible to know
how much would be required for the counseling program, but
it was certain that the services compulsory under the bill
would require the court system to procure staff on an
outside contractual basis. Mr. Wolliver replied that that
was correct.
Co-Chair Hawker assumed that the fiscal note was a
reasonable approximation. Mr. Wolliver replied yes.
1:44:39 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas declared that he supported the
legislation. He relayed that he would understand if the
program needed to request more funding in the supplemental
budget.
Co-Chair Hawker dismissed Mr. Wolliver with appreciation.
1:45:34 PM
MINDY LOBAUGH, JUNEAU, read from a prepared testimony (copy
on file):
Mr. Chairman & Members of the Committee, Thank you for
this opportunity and all you do for the State of Alaska.
This bill represents a bridge, a bridge that I and
many other jurors did not have at the end of a very
traumatic trial.
You arrive at the courthouse, given detailed
instruction of what is expected of you as a juror and how
the process of a trial works. What the court system does
not do is transition the juror out of the trial.
It is not uncommon to have major criminal trials run
for many days. I served as a juror on the Rachel Waterman
trial 4 years ago and it lasted approximately 10 days. For
me I arrived open and ready to do my civic duty as a juror.
And for 10 days prosecutors went into excruciating detail
to help the jurors relive the events of an unsuspecting
mother getting abducted from her home, tortured and finally
murdered.
It was then our duty to determine if the defendant,
her daughter was guilty of masterminding this tragedy
against a woman who was a pillar of her community. By the
end of the trial I left there as a victim feeling closed,
mentally battered and very traumatized by the burden of
knowledge that I now carried.
I am here to tell you the media does not even come
close to covering the depth of this trial. As a juror we
had access to piles of emails detailing out various ways
these men planned to kill the mother, physical evidence,
photographs and of course hours of testimony.
For quite some time during and following that trial
eating for me was a near impossibility because of the
constant nausea I felt.
To my friends and family I became a stranger……and each
night I prayed myself to sleep.
One of my fellow jury mates was pregnant with her
second child. She had shared her excitement and ultrasound
pictures with us early on. By the end of the trial she lost
her baby and had to be excused from the trial.
When this trial ended with a hung jury I turned to the
presiding judge and ask if the courts offer some kind of
counseling or process to help jurors deal with all this
traumatizing information? The answer was NO.
For me it was like having a door slammed in my face.
There would be no help transitioning back to my life before
this trial, no bridge. Rather I would have to move forward
with this dark knowledge deeply entrenched in my mind and
the minds of my fellow jurors.
It was at this point I felt the court system had
failed me as a juror doing my civic duty.
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, Please help me to
build this bridge by supporting HB 52 Post Trial Jury
Counseling. I may not have found closure with respects to
this trial but maybe you can help build that bridge for
future Jurors doing their civic duty by passing HB 52.
Thank you so much for your time and I am open to any
questions you may have.
1:49:44 PM
Representative Kerttula explained that a similar program
had been instituted in King County, Washington, and that
she had spoken with a myriad of counselors in researching
the bill.
1:50:51 PM
Representative Fairclough wondered if counselors were
available for the judges who sat in on traumatic cases.
Representative Kerttula replied that she did not think so.
She shared that while researching the bill, the level of
professional trauma had been highlighted. She believed that
legislation could be crafted that could speak to the needs
of courtroom professionals.
Representative Fairclough added that the issue was the
risk of desensitization among courtroom professionals.
Representative Kerttula agreed.
1:51:58 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze asked if the counseling sessions would be
privileged. Representative Kerttula replied that the
information would be privileged unless the client waived
the right to privilege.
Representative Salmon asked how the counseling would be
made available to jurors who resided in rural areas.
Representative Kerttula expected that the court system
would treat rural and urban jurors equally. If necessary,
counselors would be flown in to rural areas in order to
provide the service.
1:53:39 PM
HANNAH MCCARTY, STAFF, KERTTULA, added that tele-counseling
could also be provided as an option in rural areas.
Co-Chair Hawker noted that judges, as state employees,
could use state employment insurance to pay for counseling
sessions.
1:54:26 PM
Co-Chair Hawker opened public testimony.
Co-Chair Hawker closed public testimony.
Co-Chair Hawker solicited further committee testimony and
amendments.
Co-Chair Stoltze MOVED to report HB 52 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HB 52 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and the previously published fiscal note:
FN2 (CRT).
1:56:33 PM AT EASE
1:58:30 PM RECONVENED