H.B. 346 Sexual Abuse of a Child Amendments: transcript

Representative Cutler HB 3 46, sexual Abuse of a Child Amendments. Whenever you're ready. Oh, sorry. I gotta Turn you on. Test, test, test. 1, 2, 3. Great. Thank you. It's nice to be back in the law enforcement committee. Haven't been here for, uh, all year. Uh, appreciate the opportunity to be with you. Uh, HB 3 46 amends some definitions that relate to the sexual abuse of a child, for clarification. And my understanding is there was a, a court case that Uintah the appellate, uh, court state versus Francis, that, uh, addressed some of these issues. And the concern was that there were certain words that were not defined well in our Utah State Code, including uncle and Cohabitants, uh, uh, of a parent. And so this bill seeks to clear up those, um, ambiguities and make it clear that when somebody is in, in the home, living in the home, they should be considered a trusted adult. And that there are cases when a step, uh, re relation, uh, should be considered like a, uh, a blood relation, uh, if they have a special relationship with, with a child. And, uh, uh, I have with me, uh, Carl Hollen from the, uh, prosecutor's Association, uh, to also help me answer questions. But so, so the main thing is the addition of, of, of a co-resident, somebody who lives in the home, uh, as a trusted individual, uh, uh, an individual who's related by blood or marriage to somebody who's in, uh, who's in the home, who may have a very close relationship with the individual and clarification of what a partner, uh, what the definition of a partner. And all of these are related to the definition of someone who has a position of special trust, which is important in the, uh, when, uh, prosecuting sexual abuse of a child. Uh, with that, I'll turn some time over to Carl to explain the, a little bit more about the history of this.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. My name is Carl Holland. I'm the Executive Director of Statewide Association of Prosecutors. Uh, I believe as many in this committee know, um, when sexual abuse is perpetrated on children, the state of Utah has seen it fit to enhance that crime when it's committed by a person who has a position of special trust in relation to that child. And that's because those people have violated public trust, trust of the guardians of that children and trust of the child themselves by using their special access and authority over that child to perpetrate sexual abuse on that child. Uh, there was a case that came outta Davis County where, uh, a child was sexually abused by an uncle that the child knew as their uncle. Um, but as, uh, the court looked into the question of whether that person actually was an uncle under the law and was in a position of special trust, they found that they were a half brother of the child's mother. And they found that because uncle is not defined, that that position of special trust was not met and they wanted something closer. Uh, we believe that it's important that we protect our children from sexual abuse and from sexual abuse by those who are close to them. Uh, and it's important to recognize that children are going to put trust into people regardless of biological relationships. When they see these people at Thanksgiving dinner, when they unwrap presents at that person's house on Christmas, when that person is invited over to their house and shares time with their parents, they see these people as people that they can and should trust, and they're less likely to speak out against, uh, harms that are perpetrated by these people. And so we believe that this meets the policy objectives of the state of Utah in protecting our children, and, uh, would urge your support on this important bill. That concludes our presentation. Okay.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Marise Jones. I'm the Director of the Victim Services Commission, and we are in support of this bill for all the reasons explained by the sponsor and by Mr. Holland. We appreciate the sponsor bringing this forward. Um, elevating that protection and filling those gaps to make sure that our children are protected is critically important for their safety. And so we support it.

Hi, thank you for hearing me. My name is Rachel Christensen Thomas and I, um, formerly, uh, was a delegate since 2012 for the Utah GOP. Also, uh, Farmington leg chair, uh, for Farmington District 18 in Davis County. Um, I'm a an advocate for human, um, for, for human rights, for, for, um, anyway, um, I feel very strongly that this bill needs to pass because children, uh, are inheritance to the Lord and they are under our protection, and we will be held accountable if we do not protect our children. And it is very, very important that, um, that we pass this bill. Um, that's all I have to say. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm sure there's no reason for me to, um, rise in support of this bill. I'm sure it's unanim, it will pass immediately, but I just wanted to share that. I know this is a incredible, very important.

No, just myself. And I wanted to share, I'm sure this PA Bill will pass right away and without hesitation. But the reason I wanted to share this is over the past year, I've served in some church positions for the LDS church and as well as for, um, just being a youth myself and heard many, many stories, um, from just friends. I recently spoke at a, um, conference where I received messages from girls throughout the state of Utah sharing how they had been sexually abused. And, um, one girl in particular who just broke my heart was her father had sexually abused her, and he was getting out of prison this year. And, um, she physically cannot be in the room with a man. She's only 17 years old and she physically cannot be in the room with a man because she's had that trust violated. And I, I was, I guess, oblivious. I didn't know this was an issue in Utah, but it certainly is. And so I would rise in support of this bill. And with that, I conclude.

Alright. Yeah. My name is Seth Stewart. Um, representing myself, I'm from American Fork. I do have some concerns with this bill. Um, as per usual, when you apply enhancements to a case, um, that risks altering evidentiary requirements to prove guilt anew for each offense. And, uh, another concern I have with this is that by defining an aggravating condition in advance, that power comes from somewhere and it comes from the jury. It's the legislature substituting its own opinion in the place of a jury, which, which is supposed to have its fact finding role in the case if the, if something was aggravated, that should be plain and manifest according to the evidences available to the jury. And I don't see a need for there to be a, a leading condition or any other instruction to the jury that says they have to find a certain way, uh, because that takes away power from them, takes away power from the people to actually accurately assess guilt and determine appropriate sentencing. So for that reason, I pose this bill. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Do we have any substitutes? No. All right. Then I would recommend that we pass forward with a favorable recommendation HB 3 46.

I would move that we put this on the consent calendar.

I would, I'm willing to make this motion as long as the good representative doesn't ever run any bills like this again, because I'm very uncomfortable with him talking about this.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to say that I fully recognize this is the most important committee and, uh, I appreciate your time and attention. Thank you for finally recognizing that, Uh, as, as the experts on this committee know, sexual abuse of a child is, uh, a heinous crime that has an enhancement when someone is in a, a position of trust, a special position of trust or position of special trust. There was a court case where, uh, uh, and I believe this was in Davis County, where the definitions attached to, uh, people of special trust, uh, were found. They, they did not include, uh, a couple of key, uh, positions such as the cohabitants of a spouse. And in a case, uh, uh, there was a, a case where the, a man was referred to as an uncle who was actually the stepbrother of the mother, I believe. And that didn't fit the official definition. And so the court of, uh, appeals, uh, suggested that clarifying this would be a good idea. And I'll, uh, ask, uh, the, uh, prosecutor's Association if they, Carl from the Prosecutor's Association, if you would like to add to that presentation.

Uh, thank you Mr. Chair. Members of the committee, Carl Holland Statewide Association of Prosecutors, uh, sponsor is correct. Uh, we did have a court case. The court case decided that, uh, because of the way that uncle is not defined in code, absent a blood relation to the victim, that there would be some difficulties in prosecuting. Um, and so, uh, the sponsors brought this bill, uh, at least from the prosecutor's perspective and from many I've spoken to, this is the way everyone understood it. This is making sure that those people who have special access to children are treated differently. Um, and that those crimes are enhanced because of the additional harm it does to the children. And ensuring those that we give access to our children, uh, are worthy of that trust. Uh, so we support the bill and we would ask for your support as well. That concludes my presentation.

Uh, Mr. Chair, thank you for the question. Uh, religious leader is not defined, and that has been a question that has been asked in the past as to whether or not it should be defined. Uh, this bill does not change any of that. Understood. Uh, but if we'd like to explore that, I think that that'd be worthy of, of further discussion and study.

Marley Jones, director of the Victim Services Commission. We are in support of this bill. Uh, obviously our children are most vulnerable and they need the protection and they can also be the most trusting and they're deserving of that trust to be in the right places. So this bill is a good step forward in providing that accountability. When that trust is betrayed, it's, we are in support. Thank you very much. Next

Chair, members of the committee. My name is Felix Espinoza on behalf of Utah for rational sex offense laws in support of HB 3 46. This bill directly addresses one of the longstanding issues within this state that have child sexual abuse. Roughly 30% of registrants on Utah's sex offense registry have been convicted of this offense. A May, 2024 report from the CDC about child sexual abuse noted that the majority of these crimes, 90% are committed by those who know and care for the child. They are abusing rather than by strangers. Stranger danger is in terms of child sexual abuse is largely misleading. Meaning that people in the child's immediate circle of family, extended family, neighbors, coaches, church leaders, teachers, siblings, and even older kids, pres present the most risk. And for those children who have experienced sexual abuse, they knew the abuser, perhaps even trusted or relied on them before and any abuse ever occurred. HB 3 46 represents a focused, evidence informed step toward protecting children where the risk is greatest, while strengthening prevention and accountability by clarifying positions of special trust in aligning our response with that, uh, with what research and victim experience consistently show this bill helps ensure that our laws protect without overreaching and that sources are directed where they do the most good. We urge this committee and the Senate to support this bill.

Senator Pitcher, I move That we favorably recommend House Bill 3 46.

Uh, this is an important bill. I appreciate your support.

Speaker, in the state of Utah, sexual abuse of a child is a serious crime. And currently in our code there are enhancements that make it more serious when it is committed by someone who is in a position of trust, uh, often a family member or someone in the home. Very close. In a recent appellate court case, uh, state v Francis, uh, there was an issue that was discovered that some of the terms are not well-defined in our state code, including uncle and cohabitants of a parent. So this bill, uh, cleans up the language and makes it clear, uh, who is qualifies as a someone who is in a position of trust such as a co-resident, someone who is resides or resides in the same residence as the individual. And also, uh, includes some additional language around family relations, um, especially when it's a, a step, uh, relation or related by blood or marriage to another individual. And the both the prosecutors and the defense agreed to, we should clarify this language and improve the code. So that is the, uh, bill, please.