Sexual assault protection bill goes to Senate

Photo courtesy of: legisweb.state.wy.us Representative David Miller (R-H55), and Senator Leland Christensen (R-S17) (pictured here) are the chairmen for the joint judiciary committee that sponsored House Bill 17. The bill aims to provide means for sexual assault victims to obtain protection orders.
Photo courtesy of: legisweb.state.wy.us
Representative David Miller (R-H55), and Senator Leland Christensen (R-S17) (pictured here) are the chairmen for the joint judiciary committee that sponsored House Bill 17. The bill aims to provide means for sexual assault victims to obtain protection orders.

After passing the House last month, an amended sexual assault protection bill (House Bill 17) that would allow sexual assault victims to obtain protection orders against their perpetrators, is headed to the Senate floor.

Michael Madden (R-HD40) said that the bill has overwhelming support, and does not predict any problems with the bill passing the Senate.

“I voted for the bill, as did 57 others in the house,” Madden said.

The final vote count was 58 for the bill, and two against. The bill passed the House after amendments were made shortening the protection order from one year to three months, and only allowing a renewal if the alleged transgressor is convicted of sexual assault during the initial three month period.

The Senate Judiciary Committee passed the bill to the floor after hearing from a sexual assault victim, victims’ advocates and some police groups about the issue. This committee reversed the amendment that shortened the order to three months before passing the bill.

This will allow victims to renew the order yearly if there is a court finding that a “clear and present danger to the victim exists.” Before the House’s amendments were overturned, victims would have to go through the court system four times a year.

There are still concerns over the requirement for a conviction to be handed down in the first three months of the order.

Megan Selheim, the University of Wyoming’s STOP Violence coordinator, said that the problem is due to the difficulty with getting a criminal conviction in a sexual assault case. Many survivors do not report the crime in time for a criminal conviction, and often do not report the crime at all.

“I support the concept of the bill. However, where the bill is at right now, the way it has been amended, is extremely problematic,” Selheim said.

Opponents to the amendment also claim that this would leave victims whose assailant made a plea bargain with the courts unprotected. It is common practice for a court to accept a deal where the defendant pleads guilty to lesser charges, and in return, the court will drop other charges.

There is also concern that these amendments affect stalking victims, meaning that these victims could lose protection if the court does not convict the stalker in the three-month window the bill allows for.

The procedure to get an order against an assailant in Wyoming would be very similar to the current method that stalking or domestic violence victims go through. There would be a hearing with the victim making their case that there is a “clear and present danger” to them. The court would then decide whether or not an order of protection should be issued, and the identity of both of the parties in the hearing would be kept anonymous.

Without this bill, sexual assault victims have no way to get a protection order against their attacker in a civil suit. These orders are only available to victims of stalking and domestic violence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *