SB 122-VICTIM DEFINITION  1:37:29 PM CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the first order of business would be SENATE BILL NO. 122, "An Act relating to the definition of 'victim.'" CHAIR CLAMAN stated that Legislative Legal & Research services was authorized to make any technical or conforming changes to the bill. 1:38:09 PM REPRESENTATIVE KURKA moved Amendment 2 labeled 32-LS0422\B.2, Dunmire, 5/15/21, which read: Page 1, line 5, following "perpetrated;": Insert "or" Page 1, line 7: Delete "or" Insert "[OR]" Following "incapacitated": Insert ", or dead" Page 1, line 9: Delete "; or" Insert "or who was living in a spousal relationship with the person specified in (A) of this paragraph when the person died; [OR]" Page 1, line 10: Delete "adult" Insert "[ADULT]" Following "child": Insert ", brother, sister, grandparent, grandchild" Page 1, line 11, following "person;": Insert "or (iii) any other interested person, as may be designated by a person having authority in law to do so" Page 1, line 12, through page 2, line 4: Delete all material and insert: "[(C) ONE OF THE FOLLOWING, NOT THE PERPETRATOR, IF THE PERSON SPECIFIED IN (A) OF THIS PARAGRAPH IS DEAD: (i) A PERSON LIVING IN A SPOUSAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DECEASED BEFORE THE DECEASED DIED; (ii) AN ADULT CHILD, PARENT, BROTHER, SISTER, GRANDPARENT, OR GRANDCHILD OF THE DECEASED; OR (iii) ANY OTHER INTERESTED PERSON, AS MAY BE DESIGNATED BY A PERSON HAVING AUTHORITY IN LAW TO DO SO]." REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER objected. REPRESENTATIVE KURKA explained that the intent of Amendment 2 would be to consolidate the definitions of victims listed in the proposed bill. CHAIR CLAMAN referred to a message from the General Counsel of the Alaska Court System which conveyed that, under 12.45.015, introduction of the victim and criminal defendant to the jury, and that, under subsection (a), during jury selection and part of an opening statement at trial, a trial attorney may introduce the victim and defendant to the jury, and it had expressed concern that Amendment 2 could subject very young victims to a jury in the midst of a criminal trial. 1:40:30 PM REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked whether a youth may or may not be called to trial under currently law. CHAIR CLAMAN answered that this Amendment 2 would not pertain to testimony at a trial but to the introduction of a victim during a jury trial. REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER suggested that there had been disagreement of whether it would be appropriate to allow introduction of minor victims during trial. CHAIR CLAMAN allowed that there exists a very different perspective between matters concerning a victim at age 15 and a victim at age 3. REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked whether the proposed amendment would compel a minor to testify at trial. CHAIR CLAMAN answered that the statute contained the word "may" and that a larger concern would be a hypothetical situation in which the picture of a baby who may have been impacted [by an alleged crime] was presented during jury selection and could be prejudicial to the trial process. REPRESENTATIVE KURKA characterized the concerns brought forth by the court system were valid and suggested that the same concern would exist with the underlying bill. He noted that brothers and sisters who may or may not be adults should be included as victims. CHAIR CLAMAN stated that he would not speak on behalf of the General Counsel for the Alaska Court System but speculated that, if she were present to offer testimony, might suggest that the question of Amendment 2 would be one of a policy decision by the legislature. 1:44:44 PM The committee took an at-ease from 1:44 p.m. to 1:45 p.m. 1:46:03 PM TAYLOR WINSTON, Director, Office of Victims' Rights, stated that the existing definition of victim consists of three separate sets of victims and the court system had pointed out potential difficulties in merging them. She stated that additional issues that may have not been vetted and contemplated may exist should the three sets be combined. CHAIR CLAMAN asked whether the Office of Victims' Rights supported the proposed amendment, which Ms. Winston answered that it did not support the proposed amendment. 1:48:21 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether there existed a benefit to allowing adult siblings to qualify as victims. MS. WINSTON answered that it was her belief that it would diminish existing rights and explained that in a homicide, all family members are affected and that an individual's minor status should not preclude him/her from victim status. 1:49:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked whether the Office of Victims' Rights did not support the proposed amendment solely because it had not been fully vetted by the organization or based on its merits. MS. WINSTON allowed that ample time to review the potential impacts of the proposed amendment but stated that, in her professional experience, no issues had arisen due to the three separate groups of victims and suggested that ongoing discussions or examination of other areas of law may still be appropriate. REPRESENTATIVE KURKA asked the reason for a qualifying difference between victims defined in subsections (b) and in (c) and suggested that minor children should be included as victims in subsection (c). MS. WINSTON answered that the original intent of SB 122 differed from that which was trying to be gained through amendments. She stated that all victims are defined in subsection (a) and that victims identified under (b)(i) and (b)(ii) could have victims rights expanded to include minors due to an exception that may be made due to an individual's minor status or incapacity, and the bill would allow an adult individual to advocate on the minor's behalf. She allowed that other areas of law may exist that the change to definition could exist to achieve the stated goals of the amendment, she stated her belief that there could be unintended consequences should the amendment be adopted and HB 122 pass. 1:56:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE KURKA stated that he considered the amendment reasonable and potential scenarios existed where adult and minor children should be defined as victims. REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER maintained her objection to the motion to adopt Amendment 2. 1:57:58 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Kurka, Snyder, Kreiss-Tomkins, and Eastman voted in favor of Amendment 2 to SB 122. Representatives Vance, Drummond, and Claman voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 2 was adopted by a vote of 4-3. SB 122, as amended, was before the committee. 1:59:44 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN expressed his appreciation to the bill sponsor to examine the existing statute to include additional victims. REPRESENTATIVE KURKA expressed his support for SB 122. 2:01:08 PM REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER moved to report SB 122, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HCS SB 122(JUD) was reported out of the House Judiciary Standing Committee.