Legislature(2013 - 2014)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/25/2013 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing | |
| SB43 | |
| SB22 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 43 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 22 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 22-CRIMES; VICTIMS; CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT
2:35:20 PM
CHAIR COGHILL announced the consideration of SB 22 and noted
there were several amendments for the committee to consider.
[Version U was before the committee.]
CHAIR COGHILL asked Senator Dyson to move Amendment 1, labeled
28-GS1587\U.1.
SENATOR DYSON moved Amendment 1.
AMENDMENT 1
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR DYSON
TO: CSSB 22(JUD), Draft Version "U"
Page 1, lines 1 - 2:
Delete "and felony human trafficking"
Page 1, line 7:
Delete "or human trafficking"
Page 3, line 15, following "minor;":
Insert "or"
Page 3, lines 16 - 17:
Delete "; or
(5) felony human trafficking"
Page 7, lines 12 - 13:
Delete ";
(9) human trafficking in violation of
AS 11.41.360 or 11.41.365"
Page 7, line 18:
Delete "AS 11.41.120 - 11.41.330 [AS 11.41.120 -
11.41.370]"
Insert "AS 11.41.120 - 11.41.370"
Page 9, line 7, following "AS 11.71;":
Insert "or"
Page 9, lines 9 - 10:
Delete "; or
(5) human trafficking in the first degree
under AS 11.41.360"
CHAIR COGHILL objected for discussion purposes.
CHUCK KOPP, staff to Senator Fred Dyson, explained that
Amendment 1 deletes the references to human trafficking because
the term "human trafficking" is so broad that it could apply to
anyone who is compelled, duressed, or deceived to use their
labor skills. He cited examples of people brought to work at a
remote mining site or on a commercial fishing boat to illustrate
that the term encompasses more than sex crimes and sex
trafficking. He opined that the nature of human trafficking
would open the possibility of future legal action, both civil
and criminal.
He reviewed the amendment and noted that two references to
"human trafficking" are in the title. He explained that the
deletions on page 3 relate to Section 2, bringing a civil action
at any time. The deletions on page 7 relate to Section 10,
general time limitations for prosecution of offenses. The
deletions on page 9 relate to Section 14, authorizations by the
court for the attorney general to intercept communications.
2:40:15 PM
SENATOR DYSON stated that Amendment 1 encompasses a simple
concept, which is that most people mistake the term human
trafficking to be human sex trafficking, not labor violations.
He said the committee saw that confusion in a previous hearing
and they heard that public safety hasn't had any of those
trafficking cases to prosecute. The amendment simply removes the
term "human trafficking" and keeps the bill centered on human
sex trafficking. He offered his perspective that the amendment
offers clarification.
MR. KOPP said the last change in Amendment 1 is in Section 28 on
page 15, line 20, paragraph (M). That section relates to
incidents and offenses to which the chapter applies.
2:41:31 PM
CHAIR COGHILL noted that change did not appear in Amendment 1.
MR. KOPP responded that a member of Senator Coghill's staff
caught the omission. Both legislative legal and the sponsor's
office missed it.
CHAIR COGHILL asked if the Department of Law (DOL) had any
comment.
2:42:06 PM
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division,
Legal Services Section, Department of Law (DOL), explained that
human trafficking covers a broad range of behavior as the result
of an amendment last year that removed the requirement that one
of the elements of the offense is bringing people to the state
and then subjecting them to labor violations or adult
entertainment. She agreed that removing that element was
problematic, but the director of the criminal division has said
that there have been serious cases involving human trafficking
in this state that DOL wouldn't be able to prosecute because of
the [statute of limitations].
She said she understands the argument as a result of the change
last year, but human trafficking does cover serious felony
conduct that sex trafficking does not. For example, when some
women were brought to this state from Russia under false pretext
they were not forced to engage in prostitution; they were forced
to engage in adult entertainment and work for very little money.
2:43:55 PM
SENATOR MCGUIRE stated unequivocal opposition to Amendment 1 and
reminded the committee that she was part of those discussions
last year. She said slavery is slavery and Alaska does not
tolerate bringing people to the state under the pretense that
they will have the opportunity to be paid a wage for their
services when the real intent is to keep the people in
confinement. She recognized that Alaska has a number of
industries that make it ripe for that kind of activity and
opined that the statute should be very clear that Alaska does
not tolerate slavery, human trafficking, or sex trafficking. She
agreed with Ms. Carpeneti that these sophisticated networks
won't entice under sex trafficking; they'll invite people to the
state to be a part of a cultural dance troupe, for example. She
reiterated support for maintaining status quo with regard to
human trafficking.
2:46:05 PM
SENATOR DYSON asked if she was saying that there is no law
against deceiving somebody, bringing them to the state, not
paying them, and keeping them confined against their will.
MS. CARPENETI said there are other possibilities but they would
be very fact dependent. Depending on the circumstance,
kidnapping or theft by deception or various other charges might
apply. Although the human trafficking statute is broad, serious
crimes are committed that would not fall under felony sex
trafficking. She suggested the committee consider having only
first degree felony sex trafficking in these various provisions.
SENATOR DYSON said he was astonished that somebody who brings
people to the state and holds them against their will can't be
prosecuted without that term being on the books.
2:47:44 PM
MR. KOPP clarified that human trafficking would still be a
crime; the amendment simply applies the normal statute of
limitations to mount a civil action after a prosecution for
human trafficking.
MS. CARPENETI confirmed that human trafficking would still be in
the law, and clarified that she was talking about the civil and
criminal statutes of limitations. Right now, if human
trafficking is removed from the civil statute of limitations
provision and added to the criminal statute of limitations
provision, someone could bring a cause of action for 10 years.
2:49:22 PM
SENATOR MCGUIRE said her point is that there should be parity
between the crimes of sex trafficking and human trafficking
because they mingle and the lines are sometimes difficult to
differentiate. She disagreed with arbitrarily limiting a right
of action on human trafficking because there was no good policy
reason to treat it differently. The bill brings it all together
and says this is the kind of behavior that won't be tolerated.
She noted that at one time there was a statute of limitations on
rape and child molestation. That was changed and this should be
as well.
CHAIR COGHILL asked if both a conviction and sentence were
required.
2:51:08 PM
MS. CARPENETI said she thought a conviction was required for a
civil action.
CHAIR COGHILL said if the criminal action was already satisfied
under this conviction, the next question is whether the
potential for a civil action should forever be held open.
MS. CARPENETI said she would follow up because the statute
doesn't say it, but her understanding is that the practical
effect of bringing a civil action based on a criminal act is
that it would be easier if the person has been convicted.
2:52:26 PM
SENATOR DYSON withdrew Amendment 1 without prejudice.
2:52:49 PM
SENATOR DYSON moved Amendment 2, labeled 28-GS1587\U.2
AMENDMENT 2
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR DYSON
TO: CSSB 22(JUD), Draft Version "U"
Page 6, line 25:
Delete "AS 11.66.100(a)(2), 11.66.100(c),
[AS 11.66.100(c)] or 11.66.110 - 11.66.135"
Insert "AS 11.66.100 - 11.66.135 [AS 11.66.100(c)
OR 11.66.110 - 11.66.135]"
CHAIR COGHILL objected for discussion purposes.
2:53:11 PM
MR. KOPP explained that Amendment 2 expands the possibility of
criminal forfeiture to everyone who participates in the crimes
of sex trafficking and prostitution. The provision is
discretionary with the court. The statute also covers those who
manage, own, or supervise prostitutes.
CHAIR COGHILL asked if the Department of Law (DOL) had any
comment on Amendment 2.
2:55:26 PM
MS. CARPENETI said DOL has no object to the amendment since the
committee has already made it discretionary at sentencing. She
added DOL did some research on the equal protection question
raised in an earlier hearing and found cases that upheld
disparate penalties for the two parties involved in
prostitution.
2:56:08 PM
CHAIR COGHILL removed his objection and finding no other
objection, announced that Amendment 2 passed.
2:56:23 PM
SENATOR DYSON moved Amendment 3, labeled 28-GS1587\U.3.
AMENDMENT 3
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR DYSON
TO: CSSB 22(JUD), Draft Version "U"
Page 10, line 6, following "privileged":
Delete "and inadmissible"
Insert "; [AND] inadmissible, and may not be
used"
CHAIR COGHILL objected for an explanation.
MR. KOPP explained that Amendment 3 refers to the proffer under
AS 12.50.101. It clarifies that the testimony of the witness and
the proffer of the attorney is privileged, inadmissible, and may
not be used for any other purpose. He opined that this was fair
balance because the person is waiving their Fifth Amendment
right.
CHAIR COGHILL asked if the Department of Law (DOL) had any
comment on Amendment 3.
2:59:21 PM
MS. CARPENETI said Department of Law has no objection to the
amendment, but she wanted to clarify the mistaken testimony the
committee heard on Friday regarding who has access to the
information the witness has provided the judge in the written
proffer and testimony. Mr. Stenson assumed that both the
prosecution and the defense get to know that information, but
that is not correct. The state doesn't know what's in the
proffer, which makes it difficult to appeal the court's finding
that the witness has a valid claim of privilege. This is only a
problem in those cases that the judge decides the witness has a
Fifth Amendment privilege and says that if the state doesn't
grant immunity and get that witness to testify he will dismiss
the underlying charge against the defendant.
CHAIR COGHILL asked about potential witness intimidation and, in
Section 17, how the state could appeal something it didn't know
about.
MS. CARPENETI said the state moves cautiously when it doesn't
know. She added that after Mr. Stenson testified she thought
about adding clarification in Section 17 that the parties don't
get to see what's in that written findings. If the state appeals
the decision, that sealed document goes to the court of appeals.
3:02:40 PM
CHAIR COGHILL removed his objection and finding no other
objection, announced that Amendment 3 passed.
3:03:14 PM
SENATOR DYSON moved Amendment 4, labeled 28-GS1587\U.4
AMENDMENT 4
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR DYSON
TO: CSSB 22(JUD), Draft Version "U"
Page 19, line 14:
Delete "or volunteer"
Page 20, line 1:
Delete "or volunteer"
CHAIR COGHILL objected for discussion purposes.
MR. KOPP explained that the amendment makes it clear that
athletic coaches should be mandatory reporters, but that the
same criminal liability is not applied to volunteers.
3:03:52 PM
SENATOR MCGUIRE stated opposition to Amendment 4. To set the
stage for her objection, she read the purpose of the child
protection statute, Chapter 47.17 as follows:
In order to protect children whose health and well-
being may be adversely affected through the
infliction, by other than accidental means, of harm
through physical injury or neglect, mental injury,
sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, or maltreatment,
the legislature requires the reporting of these cases
by practitioners of the healing arts and others to the
department. It is not the intent of the legislature
that that persons required to report suspected child
abuse or neglect under this chapter investigate the
suspected child abuse or neglect before they make the
required report to the department. Reports must be
made when there is a reasonable cause to suspect child
abuse or neglect in order to make state investigative
and social services available in a wider range of
cases at an earlier point in time, to make sure that
investigations regarding child abuse and neglect are
conducted by trained investigators, and to avoid
subjecting a child to multiple interviews about the
abuse or neglect. It is the intent of the legislature
that, as a result of these reports, protective
services will be made available in an effort to
prevent further harm to the child; safeguard and
enhance the general well-being of children in this
state; and preserve family life unless that effort is
likely to result in physical or emotional damage to
the child.
SENATOR MCGUIRE applauded the governor for adding athletic
coaches and volunteers to the list of persons required to
report, because it will enhance the safety and well-being of
children in Alaska. Coaches and volunteers are on the front
lines and see kids with great frequency, sometimes more often
than their busy parents, she said.
She pointed out that the standard is a reasonable suspicion and
that there is no requirement that the volunteer investigate.
They are only required to pass their suspicion along to the
professionals. She said she cannot imagine that a volunteer who
truly cares about kids and is volunteering for the right reasons
would suddenly stop volunteering because this bill passed.
SENATOR MCGUIRE reiterated her vehement opposition to Amendment
4. It may be a volunteer that suspects a coach of child abuse,
she concluded.
3:08:07 PM
CHAIR COGHILL held SB 22 in committee with Amendment 4 pending.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Felony Theft bill.pdf |
SJUD 2/25/2013 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/1/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| Final Sectional for SB 43.docx |
SJUD 2/25/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| Letter from NFIB.pdf |
SJUD 2/25/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 43 Letter from NFIB |
| ACLU Letter ofSupport 2013.pdf |
SJUD 2/25/2013 1:30:00 PM |
Ltter from ACLU |
| FredMeyerTestimonySB43.doc |
SJUD 2/25/2013 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/1/2013 1:30:00 PM |
SB 43 |
| Graph of felony thefts in US.pdf |
SJUD 2/25/2013 1:30:00 PM |
Graph for SB 43 |
| NCSL Felony thresholds.pdf |
SJUD 2/25/2013 1:30:00 PM |
NCSL Felony Thresholds |