SB 66 CRIMES & CRIME VICTIMS  Number 147 CHAIRMAN WILKEN introduced SB 66 as the next order of business before the committee. ANNE CARPENETI , Assistant Attorney General, explained that SB 66 amends the bail statutes in Title 12 so as to agree with the constitutional amendment Article 1 Section 24. SB 66 also amends the victims rights statute, AS 12.61 in order to mirror language in the amendment and cross references to that statute, the notice rights from other titles. CHAIRMAN WILKEN noted that the committee packet included a detailed sectional analysis of SB 42. JAYNE ANDREEN , Executive Director of the Council on Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault, supported SB 66. SB 66 ensures the right of the victim to be present at any proceedings pertaining to the crime. Alaskan's have passed a constitutional amendment ensuring this as well. Ms. Andreen noted that this issue is also being reviewed at the federal level. SB 66 expands the domestic violence bill passed last year by factoring in the safety of victims of all violent crimes during sentencing and release procedures. In response to Senator Green, Ms. Andreen clarified that the safety of the victim would be factored in during any part of the process from the conditions of bail to release. Number 228 Ms. Andreen felt that the tightened standards for the court when ordering a psychological examination of a victim in Section 13 is very important, particularly in sexual assault and domestic violence cases. During such cases the credibility and mental capacity of the victim are often inappropriately questioned by the defense. Section 17 provides statutory protection to the records that the Violent Crimes Compensation Board has on the cases being reviewed. The Violent Crimes Compensation Board by virtue of the federal guidelines must keep those records confidential, however the records are often subpoenaed in sexual assault cases. In such cases, the defense wants access to that information which is available to the defense through the course of discovery. Therefore, the Violent Crimes Compensation Board spends much time filing motions to thwart the subpoenas. Section 17 would bring Alaska in compliance with the federal guidelines the board must follow. Ms. Andreen was concerned with Section 6 regarding serious provocation in homicide cases because the language could exclude victims of domestic violence. Section 8 which establishes a crime with the interference of a report of domestic violence is also of concern. Ms. Andreen was supportive of this crime being established, however it should exclude a victim from being charged with this crime. The victim should be allowed to determine whether or not the crime of domestic violence is reported. Ms. Andreen explained that often during a violent episode, the victim attempts to call 911 for protection and the perpetrator dismantles the phone to stop the call. Although such action by the perpetrator is not a crime in his/her own home, the seriousness of the assault is compounded and mentally and physically increases the risk of the victim. SENATOR WARD believed that Section 8 meant that it is illegal to interfere with the reporting of domestic violence; could that include the request not to call? JAYNE ANDREEN deferred to the Department of Law regarding the interpretation of interference. Ms. Andreen supported Section 8 and noted that there are many subtle ways in which the perpetrator can interfere with the victim's ability to gain control. Ms. Andreen foresaw this being a combination charge with assault in most cases. SENATOR WARD understood that most judges already consider the safety of the victim when determining bail. JAYNE ANDREEN said that anecdotal information from the courts indicate that many judges do consider the safety of the victim, but Ms. Andreen did not believe it to be done consistently. Number 326 BLAIR MCCUNE , Deputy Public Defender, said that he would review the bill. Section 1, 14, and 22 would change a long-standing evidentiary rule which ensures that a witness's testimony will not be impacted by the testimony of other witnesses. Mr. McCune recognized the constitutional amendment, however the main concern is to maintain due process and fairness in a trial. The judge should have the discretion to allow witnesses to testify one at a time. Mr. McCune pointed out that the case in New Hampshire acknowledged the courts discretion to exclude witnesses. The concerns with Section 6 have been mentioned by others. The law recognizes that when people are under the strain of intense emotions of fear and anger, the person does not intend to do what he/she does. Mr. McCune believed that should continue. Mr. McCune echoed the concerns regarding the definition of interference in Section 8. AS 11.56.700, resisting and interfering with arrest, requires force or criminal mischief in order to charge. There needs to be a clear definition of interference. Section 13 is a problem because the current law is protective of victims rights, but in some cases a mental examination of the victim is necessary. Section 17 is a rare occurrence of a second autopsy in which the judge should have the discretion to order. Mr. McCune said that Section 19 may lead to propensity evidence whereby a juror may be able to find that if a person did something before, he/she did it on this occasion. CHAIRMAN WILKEN asked if there was any discussion on the bill. Hearing none, Chairman Wilken announced that SB 66 would be held for further consideration. In response to Senator Ellis, Chairman Wilken did not know when the legislation would be before the committee again. SENATOR LEMAN noted that he had worked on the constitutional amendment and was interested in the implementation of statutes to make the amendment work. Senator Leman expressed the desire to continue to work on this.