Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
02/28/2022 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
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 | |
| SB31 | |
| SB189 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 31 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 182 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 189 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 189-CRIME OF SEX/HUMAN TRAFFICKING
1:49:29 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 189 "An Act relating to sex
trafficking; establishing the crime of patron of a victim of sex
trafficking; relating to the crime of human trafficking;
relating to sentencing for sex trafficking and patron of a
victim of sex trafficking; establishing the process for a
vacatur of judgment for a conviction of prostitution; and
providing for an effective date."
He noted that this was the first hearing and invited John
Skidmore to introduce the Governor's bill.
1:50:05 PM
JOHN SKIDMORE, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the Attorney
General, Criminal Division, Department of Law, Anchorage,
Alaska, stated that he had served as a prosecutor for over 24
years. He quoted Abraham Lincoln's 1854 comments, "Slavery is
founded on the selfishness of man's nature - opposition to it -
this love of justice." Six years later, he became president. In
1865, President Lincoln abolished slavery in the US. Yet, today,
the modern form of slavery is human or sex trafficking. In 2017,
despite slavery being abolished in 1865, every state in the
union has reported human or sex trafficking cases. While it has
been challenging to establish the exact numbers in the US, from
various studies, including the United Nation's Office on Drug
and Crime, human and sex trafficking is the second most
profitable criminal enterprise globally. He reported that $32
billion is earned from it. The only criminal enterprise that is
more profitable is drug trafficking.
1:51:51 PM
MR. SKIDMORE stated that there are over 40 million people
worldwide that are victims of sex trafficking. Although it is
difficult to obtain statistics, a study in 2014 estimated the
value of sex trafficking in eight US cities as between $40 to
$290 million. None of the cities listed were the largest cities
in the US, but they include Atlanta, Miami, Dallas, Denver,
Kansas City, St. Louis, San Diego, and Seattle. He stated that
this should give an idea of the magnitude of the problem in the
US. He referred to the Polaris Project Study that estimated the
US has over 100,000 human or sex trafficking victims. He
reported that the Polaris hotline receives over 1,500 calls a
day reporting sex trafficking in every state each year. The
study identified over 49,000 victims. He related that the US
Attorney's Office prosecuted cases against those running sex
trafficking rings in Alaska. In 2020, the Journal of
Interpersonal Violence reported that one in seven runaways were
victims of sex trafficking, and 60 percent of the victims in sex
trafficking were runaways who have a relationship with their
trafficker. He reported that 92 percent of those involved in sex
trafficking have substance abuse. The at-risk factors include
family members in sex work or friends who purchase sex. He
reported that 88 percent of the victims had suffered sexual or
physical abuse, 52 percent were motivated by money, and 72
percent of victims still live at home with their parents.
1:55:09 PM
MR. SKIDMORE read from the January 2020 National Human
Trafficking Prosecution Best Practices Guide.
[Original punctuation provided.]
Many trafficking victims are not abducted, they are
recruited. They have been seduced into their
circumstances by traffickers posing as friends,
mentors, or adoring suitors. Only after victims have
become emotionally involved in the relationship will
the sinister nature of the true relationship come to
light.
The most common scenario for trapping girls in the sex
trade is a trafficker posing as an older boyfriend. In
the beginning, Romeo-like tactics are used to lure the
victim into what is portrayed as a romantic
relationship. The "boyfriend," who is really a pimp,
doles out compliments, gifts and attention that the
teen craves. Soon he asks her to sell her body for
sex, "just this one time." It is never just one time.
But, now that she's done it once, the victim can be
demeaned and shamed into continuing to sell her body
for sex. The trafficker brainwashes the young woman
into believing he is the only person who will accept
her after what she has done.
1:56:32 PM
There's no way out. She's physically forced into
everyday prostitution through starvation, coercion,
threats, forced drugging and eventually addiction.
This insidious progression might involve picking up
one or more drug charges, which can negatively impact
future educational or professional opportunities. In
some cases, the next step might be branding a form
of control and ownership that takes on many forms such
as the trafficker's prison number, his name or his
moniker. The tattoo often includes references to
money. This is a game of psychological warfare that
preys on the challenges of being an immature teenager.
Other recruitment methods include using women already
involved in sex work, either those who are working
together as a method of survival, or who want to
maintain their relationship with their pimp. They
often recruit impressionable girls from school,
inviting them to parties and enticing them with drugs
and material items.
1:57:47 PM
MR. SKIDMORE emphasized the first item on the following list.
Those susceptible to being recruited include:
• Children who have witnessed domestic violence
MR. SKIDMORE reminded members to consider that Alaska has issues
with domestic violence. The 2020 Alaska Victimization Study
released on October 15, 2021, by the Council on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault stated that 58 percent of women in
Alaska have been victims of sexual assault or domestic violence
during their lifetime.
1:58:28 PM
MR. SKIDMORE continued reading the list of those susceptible to
being recruited from the January 2020 National Human Trafficking
Prosecution Best Practices Guide.
• Children who have been victims of sexual or
physical abuse
• Children with mental or learning disabilities
• Children with addiction problems
• Children with school attendance problems
• Children with gang ties
• Runaways
• Marginally housed or homeless youth
• LGBTQ youth
1:58:48 PM
MR. SKIDMORE stated that while the state may not have concrete
numbers on the total number of human or sex trafficking cases in
Alaska, no one should be fooled into thinking it does not exist
here. He stated that this is based on cases with the district
attorney's office, discussions with the Federal Bureau of
Investigations, and conversations with Covenant House about
those who come to them for assistance. He reported that Covenant
House sheds light on how victims are recruited. Staff reports
that recruiters stake themselves outside of the Covenant House,
waiting for the young people to come outside so that they can
attempt to recruit them. He stated that the concept of someone
being physically abducted off the street is wrong. He reminded
members that 72 percent of victims live at home with their
parents. Although sex trafficking is not done through physical
violence, sex trafficking and human trafficking are done by
someone who recruited, not abducted the victim. He emphasized
that those are the dangers the state must address.
MR. SKIDMORE noted that Priceless is an organization that helps
victims of human and sex trafficking.
2:00:29 PM
MR. SKIDMORE outlined the key elements in SB 189. First, it
reorganizes human trafficking and sex trafficking crimes. It
increases the classification of these offenses to give more
effective tools for law enforcement and prosecution to handle
these crimes.
MR. SKIDMORE said it takes the most serious of these offenses,
including those who recruit and traffic someone under the age of
20, those who have legal custodianship or guardianship of the
victim, or those who run a business, such as a place of
prostitution or criminal enterprise, and classifies these
offenses as sex trafficking in the first degree, an unclassified
felony.
MR. SKIDMORE related that sex trafficking in the second degree
includes obtaining or recruiting people. This bill introduces
concrete concepts in the definition section to better understand
recruiting.
MR. SKIDMORE stated that sex trafficking in the third degree
relates to those providing assistance or support. The crime is
not solely about recruiting but about those who support human
trafficking or sex trafficking overall.
2:01:08 PM
MR. SKIDMORE stated that the bill would also delineate human
trafficking from sex trafficking. It will clarify that sex
trafficking is a sex crime, with enhanced penalties under AS
12.55.155(i). SB 189 would also make "sex trafficking in the
first and second degree" registrable offenses. The bill
increases some penalties for human trafficking, but the bill
emphasizes that human trafficking relates solely to labor. Any
sex trafficking component will not be part of human trafficking
crimes, which are subject to slightly lower penalties.
2:02:25 PM
MR. SKIDMORE explained that the January 2020 National Human
Trafficking Prosecution Best Practices Guide points out that
simply addressing the supply side won't address the problem
since demand makes human and sex trafficking profitable.
MR. SKIDMORE explained that SB 189 would address demand in two
ways. First, it would establish a new crime of "patron of a
victim of sex trafficking." Some states uniformly punish those
supplying or purchasing sex trafficked victims at the same
level. The patron could be prosecuted for an unclassified felony
under the enhanced sex sentences.
MR. SKIDMORE related that Alaska chose to increase the penalties
and to create a new class C felony for those who are "patrons of
a victim of sex trafficking" instead. It uses the standard
"reckless disregard," which requires a substantial and
unjustifiable risk that the person they are purchasing sex from
is, in fact, the victim.
2:04:01 PM
MR. SKIDMORE acknowledged that prosecuting a person as a patron
will be difficult. Establishing that the individual knows that
the person they are purchasing sex from is a victim or is
reckless to that will not be easy. Thus, this bill would target
the demand by increasing the penalties for someone purchasing a
sex act from another person. The bill does not increase the
penalties for the average prostitute or sex worker from a class
B misdemeanor. However, the patron, the person purchasing sex in
a commercial setting, will face a class A misdemeanor, with the
first offense subject to 72 hours in jail. A second offense
within five years would increase the jail time to 20 days, and a
third offense within five years would be a class C felony. He
emphasized that going after the demand side is critical to
addressing this insidious problem in Alaska.
2:05:11 PM
MR. SKIDMORE stated that SB 189 would also help victims of sex
trafficking. The bill introduces a new concept in Alaska law,
the ability to vacate a conviction. The bill also establishes a
mechanism by which a person who has been convicted of
prostitution can have that conviction vacated if they were a
victim of sex trafficking at the time of the prostitution
offense using a preponderance of the evidence. He noted that
vacating the conviction can be retroactive. The standards are
the same ones used in the bill for those who entice or recruit
someone to become a victim of sex trafficking.
2:06:08 PM
MR. SKIDMORE read the types of conduct sex traffickers use to
entice someone into sex trafficking:
Exposing or threatening to expose confidential
information, or a secret, whether true or false;
tending to subject a person to hatred, contempt or
ridicule; destroying, concealing, or threatening to
conceal or destroy an actual or purported passport;
immigration document; or another actual or purported
identification document of any person; threatening to
report a person to a government agency for the purpose
of arrest or deportation; threatening to collect a
debt; instilling a fear the person will withhold from
any person lodging, food, clothing, or medication;
providing or withholding controlled substances for the
benefit of that person; or deception as defined by AS
11.81.900.
MR. SKIDMORE reiterated that these are the types of methods
reported in the documentation, from the January 2020 National
Human Trafficking Prosecution Best Practices Guide or found in
other states to recruit individuals. These things need to be
outlawed in Alaska.
2:07:45 PM
SENATOR SHOWER asked if the supplier must be convicted in order
for the victims to have their conviction vacated. He further
asked how the victims would prove it.
MR. SKIDMORE answered no, the sex trafficker would not need to
be convicted. The victims would establish by a preponderance of
the evidence the conduct sex traffickers used to coerce in order
to have their convictions vacated.
2:08:27 PM
SENATOR SHOWER asked if a class C felony could be pled down. He
related his understanding that sex offenders never get past
their issues, so he wondered if the penalty provision was tough
enough.
MR. SKIDMORE answered that a patron of a victim of sex
trafficking begins as a class C felony, but if the person they
solicit is under the age of 18, it would be elevated to a class
B felony. He explained that when he mentioned that the third
offense was a class C felony, he was referring to those who
purchased sex from another person, but the department could not
identify whether that person was a victim of sex trafficking.
2:09:47 PM
SENATOR SHOWER asked if he had the figures for the number of
victims of sex trafficking who are male versus female.
MR. SKIDMORE did not have precise statistics, but he recalled
that approximately 90 percent of victims of sex trafficking are
women.
2:10:23 PM
SENATOR SHOWER asked whether he had statistics for the number of
victims who were addicts before being sex trafficked as compared
to those who the sex trafficker hooked on drugs.
MR. SKIDMORE said that the study asked victims of sex
trafficking if they currently had substance abuse problems but
did not ask if the victims had preexisting issues. He
highlighted that those with substance abuse problems were at a
greater risk of being sex trafficked and supplying or
withholding the drugs is a common technique for sex traffickers.
If the person does not have an addiction, it is one of the
primary ways the oppressor tries to exercise control over their
victims. He offered to make the study available to the
committee.
2:11:52 PM
SENATOR HUGHES related that it is an unclassified felony if a
person uses force, but luring, perhaps with drugs, is a class A
felony. She offered her view that force could be grabbing and
pushing someone into the room. That behavior could be worse than
someone luring by drugs. She opined that it would be more
difficult for victims to overcome drug addiction. She asked for
the rationale for the disparity. Second, allowing vacating the
conviction of prostitution might include drug offenses. She
asked whether the administration considered allowing victims to
vacate drug offenses. She explained that these victims would
have difficulty obtaining employment. She further asked if a
victim had their conviction for prostitution vacated if the drug
offenses would appear on CourtView. She related her
understanding that drug addiction is the primary tool. She
expressed an interest in making those penalties more stringent
since the sex trafficker has enslaved their victims. She
acknowledged the immense suffering victims endure.
2:14:49 PM
MR. SKIDMORE stated that the bill would vacate convictions for
prostitution. The administration is open to amendments to add in
other convictions that should be vacated. He explained that when
a conviction is vacated, it is removed from the person's record
in the Alaska Public Safety Information Network (APSIN), and
from court records, including CourtView.
MR. SKIDMORE reviewed the penalties for sex trafficking, which
are the highest in the state. Sex trafficking in the first
degree has a presumptive sentence of 20 to 30 years, with a
maximum of 99 years. Sex trafficking in the second degree is a
class A felony. He was unsure of the penalty but believed it was
15-25 years with a maximum of 99 years.
2:16:55 PM
MR. SKIDMORE explained that other states' crimes focused on
force and underage sex trafficking as the most serious crimes.
The typical recruiting falls into the next category. He
acknowledged that the legislature could elevate those instances
where the victim became addicted to a controlled substance. He
cautioned that doing so would risk that the offense becomes the
highest penalty. However, using force is typically considered
the most serious offense. It would include threatening someone
or physically hurting the victim. He highlighted that the
legislature is the policymaking body so that members can make
the determination.
2:18:30 PM
SENATOR HUGHES expressed concern that a sex trafficker who gets
someone addicted may only serve a fraction of their sentence.
She asked if the Alaska Court System could respond to
information about CourtView.
2:19:40 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Office of the Administrative
Director, Alaska Court System (ACS), Juneau, Alaska, responded
that CourtView could remove entire cases but not parts of a
case. She explained that what the public sees on the Alaska
Court System's CourtView is a subset of the entirety of
CourtView. ACS cannot remove items from CourtView without
removing them from the official court records in entirety.
CourtView shows actions taken in a case. She reiterated that ACS
could remove cases, for example, confidential cases involving
juvenile delinquents. Further, ACS can retroactively identify
cases with a prostitution conviction. If the defendant goes
through the process described in Section 27 and prevails, the
court will grant the petition, and ACS could remove the entire
case from CourtView. However, if that case also involved another
conviction, ACS could remove the whole case or none of it.
MS. MEADE reported ACS data that shows that most cases that have
a conviction for practicing prostitution have only that charge.
She acknowledged that some cases have other convictions. She
stated that the bill would be problematic for ACS. She referred
to page 21, lines 26-28, which would leave ACS discretion to
determine whether to remove the case or leave it posted. She
suggested language might need clarification to provide specific
direction to the court system.
2:22:15 PM
SENATOR KIEHL recalled that the committee heard from the
administration two years ago about the sex trafficking of
minors. The committee asked the administration to identify the
most important way to help minors. He was surprised to learn
that the answer was not adopting stiffer penalties or changes in
the law but removing the victims from their circumstances for
more than 30 days. The primary reason was so they would be free.
Second, if the victim was unable to house, feed, and clothe
themselves except through their trafficker or they perceived
they could not, it was unlikely the case would be prosecuted. In
addition, the victim might have charges brought against them. He
asked for the administration's proposal to arrest the trafficker
and get the sex-trafficked victims out of their situations to
live safe and independent lives.
2:24:44 PM
MR. SKIDMORE agreed that the most significant thing the
department can do would be to establish a relationship and
rapport with the victim. He referred to the white paper from
January 2020 National Human Trafficking Prosecution Best
Practices Guide White Paper, which contains several sections
that discuss methods to establish that rapport and trust, so
victims don't leave, enabling law enforcement a better chance to
arrest the sex trafficker. He offered to provide the White Paper
to the committee. The state has some resources available to
assist with those efforts, although he did not have the list
before him today. He related that the administration's "People
First" initiative also focuses on sex trafficking and human
trafficking. He offered to provide additional information to the
committee.
2:25:54 PM
MR. SKIDMORE corrected an earlier reference he made to AS
12.55.155. He said he misspoke and meant to say AS 12.55.125
when referring to sex trafficking in the first degree. The
sentencing range for a first offense of sex trafficking in the
first degree is 20-30 years, for sex trafficking in the second
degree is 15-30 years, and the maximum is 99 years.
2:26:57 PM
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law, Juneau, Alaska,
prefaced comments on the sectional analysis by stating that sex
trafficking is illegal. One thing the department has done was to
make changes to sex trafficking statutes and relocate them. She
explained that many changes in the bill are conforming changes,
such as changing the cross-references. These statutes were
previously listed in AS 11.66, but they are now located in AS
11.41. She paraphrased the sectional analysis for SB 189.
[Original punctuation provided.]
2:27:40 PM
Section 1. This section is a conforming change to the
amendments made in sections 2-9.
Section 2. This section enacts a new offense series;
sex trafficking in the first, second, and third
degrees. In essence a person is guilty of sex
trafficking in the first degree (unclassified sex
felony) if the person traffics a person under the age
of 20, uses force when trafficking a person, or
manages a place of prostitution. A person is guilty of
sex trafficking in the second degree (class A sex
felony) if they recruit, entice, or otherwise induce
or cause a person to engage in commercial sexual
conduct. Sex trafficking in the first and second
degrees would be sentenced under the enhanced
penalties for sexual felonies and the person would be
required to register as a sex offender.
A person is guilty of sex trafficking in the third
degree if the person provides resources in furtherance
of the commission of sex trafficking. Sex trafficking
in the third degree is a class B felony if the value
of the resources is $200 or more and a class C felony
if the value of the resources is less than $200. A
person who commits sex trafficking in the third degree
would be sentenced under the enhanced sexual felony
sentences but would not be required to register as a
sex offender.
2:29:04 PM
MS. SCHROEDER referred to Sec. 11.41.350 on page 3 of SB 189.
She paraphrased the sectional analysis.
[Original punctuation provided.]
This section also enacts the new crime of "patron of a
victim of sex trafficking." A person is guilty of
being a patron of a victim of sex trafficking if they
solicit sexual conduct with reckless disregard that
the person they are soliciting is a victim of sex
trafficking. If the person solicited is under 18 years
of age this offense will be a B sex felony. If the
person solicited is an adult, this offense will be a C
sex felony. This crime would be sentenced under then
enhanced penalties for sexual felonies and the person
would be required to register as a sex offender.
While there are sex trafficking crimes already in
statute, these new crimes are broader and have updated
language to capture the ways in which sex trafficking
actually occurs. The sex trafficking statutes in
current law are repealed as those offenses will now
appear in AS 11.41 as specified in this section.
2:29:42 PM
MS. SCHROEDER continued to paraphrase the sectional analysis.
Section 3. This section amends the crime of human
trafficking in the first degree to be an unclassified
felony when the person uses force against the victim
or the victim is under the age of 20.
Section 4. This section denotes that this offense is
an unclassified felony
2:30:02 PM
Section 5. This section amends human trafficking in
the second degree to include situations in which the
perpetrator (1) exposes or threatens to expose
confidential information or a secret, whether true or
false, tending to subject a person to hatred,
contempt, or ridicule; (2) destroys, conceals, or
threatens to destroy or conceal an actual or purported
passport or immigration document or another actual or
purported identification document of any person; (3)
threatens to report a person to a government agency
for the purpose of arrest or deportation; (4)
threatens to collect a debt; (5) instills in another
person a fear that the actor will withhold from any
person lodging, food, clothing, or medication; (6)
provides or withholds controlled substances from the
person; or (7) deceives the victim.
Section 6. This section denotes that this offense is a
class A felony.
MS. SCHROEDER continued to paraphrase the sectional
analysis for SB 189.
2:30:30 PM
Section 7. This section enacts the new crime of human
trafficking in the third degree. A person is guilty of
human trafficking in the third degree if they provide
resources in furtherance of human trafficking. Human
trafficking in the third degree is a class B felony if
the value of the resources is $200 or more and a class
C felony if the value of the resources is less than
$200. This section also clarifies that corroboration
of a victim's testimony is not necessary. This
codifies current law in that a jury has the ability to
convict based on a victim's testimony alone. This
section is in current law and is simply relocated to
AS 11.41 along with the rest of the sex trafficking
statutes. This section also makes clear that any
property used to commit sex or human trafficking may
be forfeited.
2:30:51 PM
MS. SCHROEDER related that Sec. 11.41.367 and 11.41.368 in
Section 7 of the bill were restatements of current law for sex
trafficking to clarify that it is not necessary to have
corroborating evidence when a person who is testifying has been
compelled to engage in sex trafficking. Property used to
institute, aid, or facilitate human or sex trafficking includes
real property.
2:31:29 PM
MS. SCHROEDER referred to page 6, lines 1-3, provides a
definition of "victim of sex trafficking."
Section 8. This section is the definition section for
sex and human trafficking.
2:32:02 PM
MS. SCHROEDER related that Section 9 provides a technical
change, that there is some overlap between the human and sex
trafficking statutes and the crime of coercion.
Section 9. This section clarifies that the crime of
coercion is only to be used if the sex trafficking or
human trafficking elements are not present.
MS. SCHROEDER referred to page 8, to Section 10. She stated that
this provides a conforming change by correcting the cross-
references from AS 11.66 to AS 11.41.
Section 10. This section cleans up the references to
sex trafficking in the prostitution statute. Sectional
Analysis Page 3 Prepared by Department of Law
2:32:39 PM.
MS. SCHROEDER continued to paraphrase the sectional analysis.
[Original punctuation provided.]
Section 11. This section increases the penalty for
being a "John" from a class B misdemeanor to a class A
misdemeanor. Upon a third conviction within five years
the offense is again elevated to a class C felony.
Section 12. This section states that if a "John" is
convicted under the class C felony provision in sec.
11, any property used in order to commit the offense
may be forfeited. This section also clarifies that the
definition of sexual conduct used in the prostitution
statutes is the same definition that is used in the
sex trafficking and human trafficking statutes.
2:33:14 PM
Section 13. This section makes a conforming change
related to the changes made in secs. 2-9.
Sections 14 - 19. These sections make conforming
changes to sex trafficking and human trafficking
references that appear in those statutes.
MS. SCHROEDER elaborated on Section 14-19. She stated that these
make conforming changes to incorporate the new sex trafficking
and human trafficking statutes related to the statute of
limitations, interceptions of communications, and fines for
convictions. Section 18 relates to suspended entries of
judgment, and Section 19 relates to imposition of sentences. If
a person is prosecuted for sex trafficking and human
trafficking, the court may not suspend the entries of judgment
or the imposition of sentence.
2:34:39 PM
MS. SCHROEDER referred to page 13 of the bill. She continued to
paraphrase the sectional analysis.
Section 20. This section establishes that human
trafficking, as an unclassified felony, will be
sentenced between five and 99 years.
Section 21. This section makes conforming amendments
to AS 12.55.125(i) the sex offense sentencing statutes
incorporating the new sex trafficking statutes and
patron of a victim of sex trafficking statute. This
ensures that these offenses will be subject to the
higher sentences associated with sex offenses. This
section also corrects and error in the citation of
unlawful exploitation of a minor under AS
11.41.455(c)(1) and indecent viewing of a picture
under AS 11.61.123.
2:35:25 PM
MS. SCHROEDER referred to page 17 of the bill.
[Original punctuation provided.]
Section 22. This section establishes mandatory minimum
terms of imprisonment for "Johns." Upon the first
conviction the person will be subject to a mandatory
minimum term of 72 hours and upon the second and
subsequent conviction, the person will be subject to a
mandatory minimum term of 20 days. The 20 day
mandatory minimum term will not apply if the person is
convicted three times within 5 years and is,
therefore, subject to the class C felony sentencing
provisions.
2:35:47 PM
Section 23. This section makes conforming changes to
the definition of "most serious felony" reflecting the
new sex trafficking statutes.
Section 24. This section adds sex trafficking and
patron of a victim of sex trafficking to the
definition of "sexual felony" and corrects the
citation to indecent viewing of a picture under AS
11.61.123.
Section 25. This section makes changes to the
definition of "serious offense" reflecting the new sex
trafficking and human trafficking statutes.
Section 26. This section adds sex trafficking in the
first and second degrees and patron of a victim of sex
trafficking to the list of registerable sex offenses.
This section also corrects the citation to indecent
viewing of a picture under AS 11.61.123.
2:36:43 PM
MS. SCHROEDER continued to paraphrase the sectional analysis.
She referred to pages 20-21 to the vacatur of judgment in
Section 27, which would be based on a preponderance of the
evidence. There would be a rebuttable presumption that a person
under 18 years of age when they committed the offense would be
considered a victim of sex trafficking.
Section 27. This section establishes a process whereby
a person who has been convicted of prostitution can
get that conviction vacated if they are able to show
that they were a victim of sex trafficking at the time
that they committed the prostitution offense. If the
conviction is vacated the court system may not publish
records relating to the conviction on CourtView nor
may the Department of Public Safety release that
information as part of an employment background check.
2:37:06 PM
Section 28. This section amends the Violent Crime
Compensation Board statutes to include an applicant
who was a victim of sex trafficking.
2:37:20 PM
Section 29 30. These sections make conforming changes to the
changes made to the sex trafficking statutes.
Section 31. This section makes a person who has had
their conviction for prostitution vacated eligible for
a permanent fund dividend.
Section 32-35. These sections make conforming changes
to the changes made to the sex trafficking statutes.
MS. SCHROEDER explained that Section 32 referred to the Child in
Need of Aid statutes, Section 33, relates to the juvenile
delinquent statutes, Section 34 provides conforming changes to
those adjudicated for sex trafficking, and Section 35 relates to
child protection statutes.
2:39:13 PM
Section 36. This section is the repealer section.
Section 37. This section is the applicability section.
The majority of this bill will apply to offenses
occurring on or after the effective date.
Section 38. This section establishes the effective
date as July 1, 2022.
2:39:36 PM
SENATOR SHOWER asked whether the bill addresses sex trafficking
and human trafficking on the internet.
MR. SKIDMORE answered that 92 percent of recruitment happens
online. The bill covers sex trafficking and human trafficking,
whether it happens online or in person.
2:40:10 PM
SENATOR SHOWER referenced Section 12 and asked what protections
the bill has for people renting property who are not part of any
sex or human trafficking. He noted that many military members
rent property.
2:40:47 PM
MR. SKIDMORE responded that when someone owns the leased or
rented property and sex trafficking or human trafficking occurs,
the investigation must identify the person engaged in the
illegal conduct. If the owner is the person involved in unlawful
conduct, the property could be forfeited. He was unsure whether
any protections were available to renters. Conversely, suppose a
renter is involved in the illegal activity, and the owner is
unaware of it. In that case, the property cannot be forfeited
unless the state can prove the owner "knowingly" was aware of
sex trafficking or human trafficking. He noted that is based on
case law related to forfeiture.
2:41:43 PM
SENATOR KIEHL related his understanding that the bill is
prospective. He asked whether the vacatur was retroactive.
MS. SCHROEDER answered yes. She clarified that prospective
applied to petitions filed for vacating any judgment from the
effective date forward. However, it would allow reviewing
convictions that occurred before that date.
2:42:15 PM
SENATOR MYERS directed attention [page 5, lines 17-18] to the
definition in paragraph (6). He read:
"place of prostitution" means any place where another
person engages in commercial sexual conduct;
SENATOR MYERS stated that it doesn't indicate the owner knows
what is occurring. For example, a large hotel could
unintentionally be a place of prostitution. He asked whether a
hotel owner would be held accountable for sex trafficking in the
first degree if the party was unaware of the activity occurring
in the property.
MR. SKIDMORE answered no. He explained that the mens rea or
mental element requires that the person engaged in conduct
"knowingly" and is reckless to the circumstance. He referred to
page 2, Section 2.
Sec. 11.41.340(a) Sex trafficking in the first degree.
(a) A person commits the 11 crime of sex trafficking
in the first degree if the person ...
(4) "manages, supervises, controls, or owns, either
alone or in association with others, a prostitution
enterprise or a place of prostitution.
MR. SKIDMORE stated that another statute applies since the mens
rea was not specifically mentioned in that statute. The person
would need to be "knowing" as to the conduct and "reckless" as
to the circumstance. This means the person would need to know
they owned it and "reckless" as to the conduct occurring in that
location.
2:43:53 PM
SENATOR MYERS referred to page 2, line 15, to sex trafficking in
the first degree. He asked why the language in paragraph (2)
refers to a victim under 20 years of age rather than 18 years of
age.
MR. SKIDMORE answered that language is the current law for sex
trafficking. He stated that was the result of an amendment in
2012 proposed by then-Representative Gara to change the age from
18 to 20. It was based on the belief that someone 18 years of
age, typically the age of someone graduating from high school
through 20 years of age, was still young and impressionable.
2:45:11 PM
SENATOR MYERS reviewed the elements for sex trafficking in the
first degree and sex trafficking in the second degree. He
related that sex trafficking in the first degree includes "use
of force or threat of force" but it appeared something like
"blackmailing" would fall under sex trafficking in the second
degree.
MR. SKIDMORE answered yes.
2:45:42 PM
SENATOR MYERS referred to page 3, line 8, to the language "with
reckless disregard" [in Sec. 11.41.350] related to the patron of
a victim of sex trafficking. He asked how the prosecutor would
prove "reckless disregard."
MR. SKIDMORE answered that the definition of "reckless" is in
statute. He paraphrased [AS 11.81.900], which read:
(3) a person acts "recklessly" with respect to a
result or to a circumstance described by a provision
of law defining an offense when the person is aware of
and consciously disregards a substantial and
unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that
the circumstance exists; the risk must be of such a
nature and degree that disregard of it constitutes a
gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a
reasonable person would observe in the situation;
2:46:27 PM
MR. SKIDMORE stated that in terms of a patron of a victim of sex
trafficking, the prosecutor would consider the patron
disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the person
they were purchasing sex from was actually a victim of sex
trafficking. He explained that the prosecutor would consider all
of the ways someone could be forced into sex trafficking. For
example, did the patron notice that the person appeared to be
addicted to drugs or was malnourished; something that showed the
patron was aware or recklessly disregarded that the person was a
victim of sex trafficking. He noted he was not saying that it
would be easy for a prosecutor to establish. The elevated
penalties of a class C or class B felony would apply if a
prosecutor could establish proof beyond a reasonable doubt that
the patron disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk the
person was a victim of sex trafficking.
2:47:30 PM
SENATOR MYERS pointed out that the bill has a long list of ways
a person could be enticed into human trafficking but not for sex
trafficking.
MR. SKIDMORE answered that the exact list of inducements also
applies to sex trafficking [as shown in Sec. 8]. He referred to
page 6 to the definition of "victim of sex trafficking."
2:48:08 PM
SENATOR MYERS pointed out that the language lacked an explicit
linkage between committing sex trafficking and the victim of sex
trafficking. He acknowledged that it was a common-sense linkage,
but he wondered if it needed to be tightened up.
2:48:35 PM
SENATOR KIEHL indicated that the definition of a "victim of sex
trafficking" means "a person who has been induced or caused to
engage in," but earlier in the bill [in Sec.2 on page 2, lines
23-24] it uses the language "recruits, entices, or otherwise
induces or causes...." He asked for the difference between the
terms "recruit," "induce," "entice," and cause".
MR. SKIDMORE responded that induce, entice, or cause sound
similar, but it is a pattern used in drafting. He was unsure
whether he could explain the minute differences. He stated that
causing might not always apply because the person entices or
induces the victim during recruitment. He offered his view that
using all three terms attempted to capture the sentiment
adequately. He suggested that to get into the nuances of the
language, he would need to look it up in a dictionary.
SENATOR KIEHL acknowledged that the breadth was good, but the
committee might need to understand the nuances and meaning.
2:51:01 PM
SENATOR HUGHES said she reviewed the range of sentences for sex
trafficking and human trafficking in Sections 7 and 20. She
asked whether other states have a duty to report activity
because it may save some of the victims many years of agony. She
further asked what services someone would provide that would
further the industry, and whether the person was picking up dry
cleaning, cleaning their rooms, or something else.
2:52:51 PM
MR. SKIDMORE responded that he was unsure whether other states
had a duty to report. For instance, for sexual abuse of a minor,
the department currently imposes a duty to report on certain
individuals who come into contact with minors, including
teachers and medical professionals. He was unsure whether the
same duty to report would apply for minor victims of sex
trafficking, but it is certainly possible. He suggested that
there might need to be an educational component. He recalled
reading a substantial number of myths or misconceptions around
sex trafficking and how to identify victims. Thus, it would take
training before expecting people to see the signs.
MR. SKIDMORE explained that the language "services" was a term
used by other states to capture things like providing
transportation or chaperoning the sex-trafficked person to
ensure that the party pays, but the "chaperone" might not be the
person keeping the profits. The person who accompanies the sex-
trafficked person would be providing a service. It is difficult
to know or quantify every nuance, so the bill uses the language
"... provides services, resources, or other assistance in
furtherance of a violation...." He explained that the person
would be assisting in helping the violation, the commercial
sexual conduct, occur.
2:55:55 PM
SENATOR KIEHL turned to unclassified felonies. He related his
understanding that for commercial sexual conduct, it doesn't
matter whether a person was made to engage in sexual penetration
or to watch someone engaged in heavy petting. He asked why the
bill doesn't differentiate the severity of the conduct.
MR. SKIDMORE turned to page 5, to the definition in AS 11.41.370
(5), which read "commercial sexual conduct" means sexual conduct
for which anything of value is given or received by any
person;.... He acknowledged that this language could be
tightened up. He stated that "(9) "sexual conduct" means
participating in, observing, or requiring another person to
observe sexual contact, sexual penetration, or the conduct
described in AS 11.61.140(f);." He stated that under that
definition, he understands the tiered approach Senator Kiehl
mentioned.
2:58:21 PM
SENATOR MYERS referred to page 5, lines 2-6 related to
corroboration of certain testimony not required. He asked
whether any other crimes do not require corroboration.
MR. SKIDMORE responded that this language is the current
statute. He said he could not think of any other crime that
expressly does not require corroboration. He stated that it
would not alter the burden of proof which is proof beyond a
reasonable doubt. It ultimately would be for the jury to decide.
2:59:22 PM
SENATOR MYERS referred to page 5. He said a victim could accuse
someone of sex trafficking without corroboration. However,
referring to page 8, line 15, he related his understanding that
the victim would have to corroborate that they were a victim of
sex trafficking to avoid being charged for prostitution.
MR. SKIDMORE said this language is the current statute. He
offered his belief that this provision does not require
corroboration. This statute, AS 11.66.100, states that a person
cannot be prosecuted for one of the enumerated crimes against a
person. He read a portion of AS 11.66.100(d)(2) "evidence
supporting the prosecution under (a)(1) of this section was
obtained or discovered as a result of the person reporting the
crime to law enforcement, and (3) person cooperated with law
enforcement personnel." It means that a sex worker reporting one
of the enumerated crimes cannot be prosecuted for prostitution.
For example, the person might say they were involved in a
commercial sex act, but the person who was supposed to pay
pulled a gun and robbed them. In this instance, the prosecutor
would not prosecute the sex worker and would give them immunity
because they would seek to charge the higher crime. This
paragraph requires cooperation with law enforcement but no
corroboration.
3:02:56 PM
SENATOR KIEHL referred to page 3, line 24, Section 3, AS
11.41.360(a)(1) and stated that this removes the language "in
the state." He related his understanding that it would not
require that sex trafficking occur in the state, but he was
unsure what bad conduct would not be required to occur in
Alaska.
MR. SKIDMORE answered that the language "in the state" might be
confusing. He explained that jurisdiction for criminal conduct
requires an actus reus, and that act has to occur within the
state. Jurisdictional law would require either the trafficker or
the victim to be in the state. For example, someone could be
engaging in commercial fishing activity in waters beyond the
state's jurisdiction. Still, prosecutors could prosecute a
person for sex trafficking in Alaska if the trafficker is
present in Alaska. The jurisdictional protection still exists.
The state could not prosecute someone in Washington state if the
trafficker and the victim were both in Washington and there was
no nexus or connection to Alaska.
3:05:40 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked for confirmation that the forced labor or
the forcing must happen within Alaska for the state to
prosecute.
MR. SKIDMORE answered yes.
3:06:02 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND held SB 189 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 31 SJUD Amendment B.1.pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 31 |
| SB 189 Transmittal Letter.pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Highlights 2.14.22.pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Fiscal Note 1 (OPA).pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Fiscal Note 2 (Public Defender).pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Fiscal Note 3 (Corrections).pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Fiscal Note 4 (LAW).pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Fiscal Note 5 (Troopers).pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Fiscal Note 6 (Justice).pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |
| SB 189 Fiscal Note 7 (Courts).pdf |
SJUD 2/28/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 189 |