Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/18/1996 08:08 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 485 - INTERFERENCE WITH DISTRIB. OF FREE PAPERS The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs Committee was HB 485. CHAIR JAMES called on Christopher Knight, Researcher to Representative Terry Martin, to present the bill to the committee members. Number 0888 CHRISTOPHER KNIGHT, Researcher to Representative Terry Martin, explained Representative Martin introduced HB 485 to address a problem that was present on the college campuses across the nation. Individuals that disagreed with the contents of a periodical were disposing of them in large numbers. He cited there had been similar instances in Fairbanks, Anchorage and Juneau. House Bill 485 tried to address this issue by amending AS 11.46.484. The bill turned the action into a crime of criminal mischief in the third degree. Furthermore, although it was a "free" paper, there were production, editor, staff, and printing cost that went into producing a free periodical. Number 1000 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked Mr. Knight, if according to the prosecutor, did the action of interfering with the distribution of a free paper not constitute a crime, or was it not considered a priority? Number 1023 MR. KNIGHT replied that was a good question. He was told directly by the Juneau Police Department that it was not a crime because it was hard to determine the worth of a "free" newspaper. Number 1063 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER suggested asking the Office of the Prosecutor. He explained just because it was free to the customer that did not mean it was a value-less item. It was at the least vandalism, destruction of private property, or criminal mischief. Number 1103 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN explained his staff pursued this issue also. They were told there was not enough person power to prosecute because it was a low priority crime. Number 1138 MR. KNIGHT replied there were criminal actions, such as, writing a bad check that were not given priority. However, it did give the banking institutions the opportunity to seek a civil suit through the law. That was the intent of HB 485. Number 1169 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Mr. Knight when he researched this issue did he look at other states before setting the penalty at $5,000? She agreed with hitting somebody in the pocket book to enforce this law. Number 1212 MR. KNIGHT replied many versions of the bill were drafted and other states were looked at. However, the current bill was considered by the sponsor the best place to start. The court would probably recommend community service or paying a fine to the institution rather than fining the individual $5,000 or sending him to jail. The sponsor would be open to amendments to move the bill forward. Number 1269 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Mr. Knight what would happen to a person if the Juneau Empire or the Anchorage Daily News, for example, were stolen? Number 1277 MR. KNIGHT replied because those newspapers were paid for it automatically was a theft. Number 1305 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN wondered if stealing a car was considered the same as stealing a few newspapers. He cited AS 11.46.484 addressed both actions. Number 1341 CHAIR JAMES said this was a cloudy issue. She wondered if the action of removing a few newspapers because of its contents was an expression of free speech. She did not support vandalistic behavior, however. She further commented about the vulnerability of a stack of free periodicals and wondered if it invited that type of behavior. Number 1449 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER agreed that stacking free periodicals so that they could be accessed easily was a common sense mistake. However, he did not doubt that the behavior was theft and at a minimum criminal mischief. Therefore, another crime in statute was not needed, but rather inspiring law enforcement and prosection to take the cases. He further suggested distributing the periodicals individually or including a sign that read "one per customer" as possible solutions. Number 1505 REPRESENTATIVE OGAN said the bill could be amended to include campaign literature to pass the bill forward in the legislative process. Number 1513 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered how a case like this would ever be prosecuted. Number 1528 CHAIR JAMES said many questions were involved, such as, where was the stack of periodicals or was it a private area or a public area. She agreed with Representative Porter that the behavior could be considered criminal mischief. Prosecuting the behavior would be very difficult, however. Furthermore, actions were sometimes put in statute to announce the illegal activity. Number 1603 MR. KNIGHT replied society was such today that newspaper stands and stacks were more viable to distribute the periodicals. That did not invite criminal behavior, however. There had been hundreds of cases of this type of behavior. He cited one case was taken to court in Florida of which fines were assessed. It was an issue that needed to be addressed in Alaska. The states of Vermont and Maryland were also working on a law to address this issue. Moreover, the bill was drafted with intent language to prove the behavior. Number 1691 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he was not a lawyer or a law enforcement person, but he believed intent was the toughest behavior to prove. He championed the idea of the bill but believed it would be another law that would not be enforced. Number 1725 CHAIR JAMES stated that common law was based on intent which had been forgotten over the years. She understood intent was hard to litigate, however. It was more an issue now if one did it rather than if one intended to do it. Number 1746 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated there was a requirement to establish intent for crimes of this nature. Furthermore, each crime had specific elements and each element needed to be established that they occurred. Evidence was then needed to support the criminal elements. After the evidence was collected, the case needed to be sold to the prosecutor. That process would continue whether or not the crime was in statute or not. Moreover, he explained intent could be implied by the actions. Number 1834 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON suggested the concept of a violation rather than a criminal act in statute. This would circumvent the prosecutor's office and use a judge instead. Number 1907 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER replied a police officer now could write a misdemeanor citation for this offense. He said it was a good idea to reduce the offense to a violation to circumvent the prosecutor's office. The campus security office would then be more motivated to enforce the violation. He called it a viable approach. Number 1949 CHAIR JAMES wondered if there were campus rules and regulations that were being violated now. Furthermore, she wondered if the person that handed out the free literature was responsible for the litter that was produced. Number 2036 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered if the consequence of a misdemeanor was really intended. He further wondered, if the last two periodicals, for example, taken by somebody would constitute a crime. He wondered again if that was the intent of HB 485. Number 2070 CHAIR JAMES said this issue needed more thought. She was willing to move the bill forward to the House Judiciary Committee, however. Number 2105 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said it was more appropriate for the House Judiciary Committee to review this issue further. She was willing to move the bill forward today. Number 2122 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON moved that HB 485 move from the committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. CHAIR JAMES announced there were witnesses present to testify. REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON withdrew her motion. CHAIR JAMES called on the first witness in Juneau, Brooke Rohweder, Editor, Whalesong Student Newspaper, University of Alaska Southeast. Number 2151 BROOKE ROHWEDER, Editor, Whalesong Student Newspaper, University of Alaska Southeast, explained stacks of the Whalesong were found in the local dumpster. The act was witnessed but no consequence was ever imposed. She strongly felt that something needed to be done. She said a person stole more than a free newspaper, he stole the written work of students and tuition dollars. Every student paid an activity fee of which a few dollars went to the production of the Whalesong which was about $10,000 per year. That money was also being thrown away. Advertising was also being thrown away which was worth about $1,000. Furthermore, it was a violation of the right to free speech. Moreover, because the person at the university never felt any repercussions, he could get away with it again. She announced it was a faculty member. Number 2261 CHAIR JAMES said she understood the passion of Ms. Rohweder. She reiterated it was a subject that needed further attention. MS. ROHWEDER replied she was glad that it would receive further attention. She did not want the bill to die. Number 2278 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated to Ms. Rohweder the violation that occurred was criminal mischief in the fourth degree. Number 2288 MS. ROHWEDER replied the idea of using campus security was good because if a ticket was issued the person had to go to court. Number 2297 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Ms. Rohweder if the chancellor reprimanded the faculty member? MS. ROHWEDER replied it was an internal matter. She did not know. Number 2311 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked Ms. Rohweder if the concept of a violation was a direction that she would support? MS. ROHWEDER replied, "absolutely." Number 2329 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON moved that HB 485 move from the committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. Hearing no objection, it was so moved from the House State Affairs Committee. She asked that the concept of a violation be looked at in the next committee of referral - the House Judiciary Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|