By RONNIE ELLIS
FRANKFORT — No one wants to oppose a bill to protect victims of domestic violence – especially lawmakers after one of their former colleagues was charged with murder of a woman who’d sought court protection from him.
“Amanda’s Bill,” sponsored by House Speaker Greg Stumbo, D-Prestonsburg, quickly sailed through the House but is encountering questions from judges who will have to administer the law – and others – as it is debated in the Senate. The bill would allow judges to require respondents in civil domestic abuse cases to wear GPS tracking devices which will allow authorities to track their movements wherever they go.
But district and family court judges – who hear the vast majority of such cases – testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday about concerns about the cost, the administration and even the constitutionality of the bill. Committee Chair Sen. Tom Jensen, R-London, said 18 states use the devices but all for criminal cases, none for civil cases.
“It appears at first blush it may not pass constitutional muster if you’re tracking every movement,” said Jefferson County Judge Patricia Walker Fitzgerald. She said most cases involve claims and counterclaims by only two people, without corroborating evidence and her decisions are based upon a lower standard of proof than in a criminal case.
Clay County Judge Gene Clark said the devices may not operate effectively in his county which does not have cell phone coverage, a fear shared by Pike County Family Court Judge Larry Thompson. Thompson is president of the Circuit Judge Association and said he’s received more than 100 calls from judges across the state expressing concerns about the legislation. Their fears ranged from the costs, how to administer an assessment of alleged perpetrators’ potential to commit violent acts against their accusers, and restrictions on the liberty and movement of people who haven’t been convicted of a crime.
Stumbo later said he’d met with judges and isn’t bothered by their concerns, saying he’s not opposed to tweaking the bill to meet those concerns.
“Obviously we want to give them something that works,” Stumbo said. “It’s a tool for them to use, and if they don’t use it, it won’t do any good.”
Nor, he said, is he worried those concerns might sidetrack passage of the bill in the Senate. “I’m confident it will pass,” Stumbo said.
All who spoke about the bill in Thursday’s committee hearing went out of their way to say they support the intent of the bill and generally support it. Some of the female judges who spoke about problems they see as judges revealed they had been victims of abuse themselves.
Judge Susan Johnson, whose district covers Johnson, Lawrence and Martin counties, said she was once held at gunpoint by a boyfriend.
“I am here today because he didn’t pull the trigger and he let me go,” Johnson said. “I can assure you I understand the importance of protection for the victim.”
Judge Linda Armstrong’s voice wavered as she told the committee she’d been the victim of abuse and even date rape as a young, single lawyer, something until now she’d never told her husband.
“We’re all in favor of a bill that protects victims of domestic violence,” she said. “I want to make (the bill) so we have a bullet proof bill.”
Jensen said the committee plans additional hearings on the bill, but the aim is to improve it so it doesn’t run afoul of constitutional protections and costs to counties. He said his committee plans to hear from vendors of the GPS devices, law enforcement, and perhaps even a constitutional law expert. But he thinks some version of the bill will pass this session of the legislature.
RONNIE ELLIS writes for CNHI News Service and is based in Frankfort. Reach him at rellis@cnhi.com. Follow CNHI News Service stories on Twitter at www.twitter.com/cnhifrankfort.
