Legislature(2001 - 2002)
01/31/2002 03:30 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 240-TERRORISTIC THREATENING/PIPELINE DAMAGE
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT announced there was a proposed committee
substitute (CS) before the committee and a request from the
departments to consider additional language. He asked for a
motion to adopt the \C version as the working document.
SENATOR DAVIS moved to adopt the \C version of SB 240 as the
working document. There was no objection.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked Annie Carpeneti to explain the proposed
amendment.
ANNIE CARPENETI from the Department of Law explained the
amendment before the committee was the result of additional
conversations among state attorneys general who are identifying
areas of the law that should be strengthened to provide for
adequate response to crimes committed by terrorists.
The first is an amendment to the conspiracy laws to add three new
target crimes to the present law. These additions are:
1. Conspiracy to intentionally cause damage to an oil or gas
pipeline or supporting facility.
2. Terroristic threatening by conspiring to send a dangerous
substance such as anthrax or an imitation substance to
another person.
3. Conspiring to commit criminal mischief in the first degree
such as tampering with an oil or gas pipeline or supporting
facility.
The second suggestion would provide amendments to the statutes
addressing murder in the first degree. It adds:
1. Intentionally causing damage to an oil or gas pipeline that
directly results in the death of a person.
2. Committing terroristic threatening in the first degree and
in the course of or furtherance of the offense or in
immediate flight from that offense, the death of a person is
the direct result.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked for clarification of, "death during
flight from the scene."
MS. CARPENETI explained it refers to perpetrators fleeing the
scene. It does not apply to one victim fleeing the scene who
happens to run over another fleeing victim.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT then asked for clarification of, "a direct
result of."
MS. CARPENETI replied it must happen in the course of or
furtherance of the underlying crime. It can't be an accidental
crime that's unconnected to the actions of the person
perpetrating the underlying felony.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said the meaning of, "a direct result" is
clear if a pipeline facility is blown up and a worker is
killed in the explosion, but what about an individual that has
a heart attack?
MS. CARPENETI said if the individual is at the scene and has a
heart attack as a result of being present and under the stress
of the explosion then the law would apply. However, it would
not apply to injured or killed firefighters who would come to
put out the fire because that wouldn't be in the course of or
furtherance of the felony.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT asked if there would be a connection if a
bomb struck the Capitol Building and an individual in the
State Office Building next door died of a heart attack.
MS. CARPENETI said it probably would not apply here because it
would not be in the course of the explosion in the Capitol
Building.
MS. CARPENETI said the last item covered in the amendment came
as a suggestion from the legislative attorney, Jerry
Luckhaupt, and may have been addressed in the CS. It is for
terroristic threatening in the first degree to apply to real
or imitation biological or chemical substances.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT said it was not covered in the CS and
advised committee members the bill wording said, "an imitation
substance."
MS. CARPENETI established if a real substance such as anthrax
was sent and no one was harmed it wouldn't apply so the
amendment makes the repair.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT noted section 2 of the CS creates a new
category of conspiracy and he questioned why this wasn't
incorporated into the existing statutes on conspiracy.
MS. CARPENETI pointed out it isn't referring to conspiracy but
criminal mischief by damaging an oil or gas pipeline or
supporting facility. She explained they brought this up to
criminal mischief in the first degree as a separate crime
because it is only one act, not a series of acts. They could
have incorporated this into existing statutes and had criminal
mischief in five degrees rather than four degrees, but doing
so would require changing all the other statutes.
Additionally, such a change would be cause for some confusion
in law enforcement because criminal mischief in the first
degree, which is now a class B felony, would change to a class
A felony.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT announced his intention to continue
working with the legal department to address the drafting
choice on section 2.
SENATOR PHILLIPS expressed the same concern.
CHAIRMAN THERRIAULT thought the final document would be ready
next week.
CSSB 240 was held in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|