HB 138 - CRUELTY TO ANIMALS  [Contains brief mention that Version T of HB 138 would act as a House companion bill to SB 214, and that the provisions of those two bills along with the provisions of HB 6 might be incorporated into a single vehicle.] 2:07:40 PM CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 138, "An Act relating to cruelty to animals." [Before the committee was the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 138, Version 26-LS0351\P, Luckhaupt, 4/2/09, which had been adopted as the work draft on 4/8/09.] 2:07:48 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 138, Version 26-LS0531\T, Luckhaupt, 2/4/10, as the work draft. REPRESENTATIVE HERRON objected. 2:08:38 PM THOMAS REIKER, Staff, Representative Carl Gatto, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of the sponsor, Representative Gatto, explained that Version T would bring HB 138 in line with, and make it a house companion bill to, SB 214, sponsored by Senator Wielechowski. He indicated that under Version T, killing an animal through the use of poison or a decompression chamber, or knowingly inflicting severe and prolonged physical pain or suffering would be a class C felony; and, for a first offense within 10 years, negligently causing the death or severe physical pain or prolonged suffering of an animal, or killing or injuring an animal] with the intent to intimidate or terrorize another person would be class A misdemeanor. He noted that Version T no longer proposes to establish the crimes of cruelty to animals in the first degree and cruelty to animals in the second degree. 2:10:22 PM KRIS SELL, Lieutenant, Juneau Police Department (JPD), City & Borough of Juneau (CBJ); President, Capital City Chapter - Juneau, Alaska Peace Officers Association (APOA), relayed that on behalf of the JPD, the CBJ, and the APOA, she would be speaking in support of the increased penalties for crimes of cruelty to animals as proposed via HB 138. At 8:56 a.m. this morning, she recounted, the JPD received a call from a woman asking for help because her husband verbally abuses her and physically abuses her dog; the police report stated that the husband kicks the dog and locks it in the bathroom for days, and that two days ago, the husband told his wife that he had a bullet for the dog. The woman was uncooperative with the investigation, however, because she didn't have any other place to go where she could also take her dog. Under HB 138, the officers could have investigated this incident as laying the groundwork for a felony charge in the future when the perpetrator's behavior escalated. LIEUTENANT SELL recounted that she'd once worked a serial domestic violence (DV) case involving a man who was beating his wife and terrorizing his children. During one assault on his family, the man was raging at his wife when his attention was drawn to the family's pet bird because it was making noise, and so, wanting to show his family that when he talked, everybody had to be quiet, he grabbed the bird out if its cage and threw it against the wall, breaking its wing. At trial, the jury members were sickened by the man's behavior; even without having been shown any studies illustrating the link between animal abuse and DV, the jurors knew intuitively, as would most people, that a man who would abuse a helpless animal would have no boundaries preventing him from abusing people. The perpetrator in this incident, however, didn't receive any significant consequences for harming the bird, but had HB 138 been in place, his actions might have warranted more jail time than he did get. LIEUTENANT SELL pointed out that a lot of studies illustrate the link between animal abuse and DV and other violent crimes - it's just a known fact in her line of work - but what sticks in her mind, she relayed, is a case involving a large angry man who would use anything within his reach to terrorize his family - a very small woman and her two young daughters. Equally well- documented is the link between children and teens involved in animal abuse and how such people then continue to go on to commit violence against people, including committing serial murder. Some cited examples of such people include Jeffrey Dahmer; Albert DeSalvo - the Boston Strangler; and Dennis Rader - the BTK killer. A 1999 article in the Boston Globe described how Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold - responsible for the Columbine High School massacre in which twelve students and one teacher were killed and 21 other students were injured - used to horrify their classmates with descriptions of how they mutilated animals, and how the two boys, during the massacre, taunted many of their victims before they shot them. LIEUTENANT SELL, in conclusion, proffered that if crimes of cruelty to animals were taken more seriously, perhaps someone would have followed up on the animal torture incidents described by Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, and maybe the massacre could have been avoided. In response to a question, she pointed out that when someone abuses an animal in order to intimidate, threaten, or terrorize another person - as outlined under AS 11.61.140(a)(5) - it's a form of domestic violence. The animal being hurt or killed in such situations is not really the intended target - the animal and the damage inflicted on it are simply being used to control the perpetrator's family. For example, a DV perpetrator will kill the family dog in front of the children in order to keep them in line. The law enforcement community, she assured the committee, understands the nuances of pets being used as tools to terrorize people. Again, the intent of the perpetrators in such situations is much greater than simply targeting an animal for abuse. 2:16:35 PM MR. REIKER indicated that Version T maintains existing statutory proportionality with regard to abusive actions taken against animals, and abusive actions taken against people, and that the intent is to stop people from escalating their abusive behavior then towards other people. In response to questions, he assured the committee that existing statute provides exemptions for accepted veterinary practices and animal husbandry practices, dog mushing and pulling contests, rodeos and stock contests; that Version T would not be amending those exemptions; and that someone could still choose to euthanize an ill animal himself/herself as long as he/she could show, if a complaint is filed, that the animal was sick and that it didn't suffer while being euthanized. He relayed that the sponsor worked extensively with the Alaska Farm Bureau to address its concerns, and that the Alaska Farm Bureau now supports both HB 138 and SB 214. MR. REIKER, in response to questions, indicated that the sponsors of HB 138, SB 214, and HB 6 are considering incorporating the provisions of all three bills into a single vehicle. In response to questions regarding an incident that occurred recently in Houston, Alaska, he indicated that existing statute addressing the act of coercing someone to commit a crime would also address those instances wherein someone abuses an animal at the direction of another person, though the courts would have to make that determination on a case-by-case basis. LIEUTENANT SELL, in response to further questions and comments, noted that officers often put down animals that are injured, but that if someone is coerced into abusing/killing an animal, then the culpability would lie with the instigator, and the existing statutes regarding the crime of contributing to the delinquency of a minor could be used instead of HB 138 to address situations in which the instigator is an adult and the person who commits the crime of cruelty to animals is a minor. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to comments and a question, indicated that a forthcoming amendment [which later became known as Amendment 1, would make certain instances of animal abuse eligible for an aggravating factor at sentencing]. 2:31:35 PM KAYLA EPSTEIN, Member, Animal Control Advisory Board, Municipality of Anchorage (MOA), relayed that the Animal Control Advisory Board unanimously voted in favor of HB 138. She went on to remark that there is a very close tie between domestic violence and sexual abuse of children, and animal abuse. Those who sexually abuse children will threaten to kill or hurt their victims' pets in order to ensure their victims' silence, and the abuse of animals is used as an aid by the perpetrators of domestic violence and of sexual [abuse of children] to demonstrate power and control over their human victims, to punish them, to isolate them, to perpetuate an environment of fear, to prevent them from leaving, or to coerce them into coming back. She noted that 71 percent of pet-owning women entering shelters have reported that their batterers have injured, maimed, killed, or threatened family pets specifically for revenge or for psychological control, and that 25 percent of abused women stay in an abusive situation because of threats to their animals - whether they are livestock or personal pets. MS. EPSTEIN relayed that in homes where a spouse is abused, a child is twice as likely to be abused if there is also animal abuse occurring. In some states, animal control officers and those who investigate cases of DV are cross-trained because of the [known] link between the crimes of DV and animal abuse. She mentioned that she's heard of cases wherein perpetrators of DV have been convicted of their assaultive behavior against animals, though not for their assaultive behavior against their human victims, because their human victims were finally willing to testify against them for the animal abuse. Furthermore, children reluctant to testify about their own abuse will testify about the abuse of an animal that they feel responsible for. MS. EPSTEIN, pointing out that healthy animals are regularly put down simply because they aren't wanted, said she doesn't see how the bill could be used against anyone who puts down an animal that is already in "an animal control situation." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG declared a potential conflict of interest in that Ms. Epstein is his wife, and asked to be excused [from voting]. REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM and REPRESENTATIVE LYNN objected, thereby requiring Representative Gruenberg to participate [in any voting that takes place]. 2:37:29 PM SANDY SAMANIEGO, Executive Director, Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (CDVSA), Department of Public Safety (DPS), stated that the CDVSA supports the intent of HB 138. She added that a person can't work at a domestic violence shelter for very long without hearing stories illustrating that animal abuse is used to control DV victims. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG again noted that a forthcoming amendment would provide for an aggravating factor at sentencing for those who have a history of animal abuse and are convicted of a felony. 2:39:32 PM RODNEY DIAL, Lieutenant, Deputy Commander, A Detachment, Division of Alaska State Troopers, Department of Public Safety (DPS), pointed out that in addition to charging an adult with the crime of contributing to the delinquency of a minor if he/she directs, encourages, or coerces a minor into harming an animal, the adult could also potentially be charged with the crime of solicitation or the crime of coercion. CHAIR RAMRAS, after ascertaining that no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 138. REPRESENTATIVE HERRON removed his objection to the adoption of Version T as the work draft. There being no further objection, Version T was before the committee. 2:41:20 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 26-LS0351\T.1, Luckhaupt, 2/26/10, which read: Page 1, line 1, following "animals": Insert "; and relating to aggravating factors at  sentencing involving assaultive behavior and cruelty  to animals;" Page 2, following line 12: Insert a new bill section to read:  "* Sec. 3. AS 12.55.155(c)(8) is amended to read: (8) the defendant's prior criminal history includes conduct involving aggravated assaultive behavior, [OR] repeated instances of assaultive behavior, repeated instances of cruelty to animals  proscribed under AS 11.61.140(a)(1) and (3) - (5), or  a combination of assaultive behavior and cruelty to  animals proscribed under AS 11.61.140(a)(1) and (3) -  (5); in this paragraph, "aggravated assaultive behavior" means assault that is a felony under AS 11.41, or a similar provision in another jurisdiction;" Renumber the following bill section accordingly. Page 2, line 16, following the first occurrence of "Act": Insert ", and to aggravating factors at sentencing under AS 12.55.155(c)(8) made by sec. 3 of this Act" CHAIR RAMRAS, after ascertaining that there were no objections, announced that Amendment 1 was adopted. 2:41:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN said he supports HB 138 because he views it as providing an appropriate punishment for all the damaged/sick/sadistic people who violently abuse animals, and characterized such behavior as spring training for future egregious crimes against humans. People like this, he opined, need more than just a slap on the hand; instead, they need handcuffs on their wrists. Certain of the egregious acts of animal cruelty that HB 138 addresses rise to a level that speaks more about the perpetrator than they do about the victim or property destroyed. He said that he sees egregious acts of animal abuse as a "stair-step kind of crime," with the perpetrators being on the threshold of committing serious crimes against children and other humans. In conclusion, he characterized HB 138 as a good bill that he intends to support, and opined that HB 138 compliments HB 6 - a bill [he introduced] that addresses the crime of bestiality. 2:43:31 PM REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM moved to report the proposed CS for HB 138, Version 26-LS0531\T, Luckhaupt, 2/4/10, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 138(JUD) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee. TIANA PETERSON said she respects HB 138, and that she has been opposed to animal cruelty ever since she can remember, and indicated that her mother, aunt, and grandmother [work with animals]. [CSHB 138(JUD) was reported from committee.]