Please move to report these bills out in respect and solidarity for trafficking victims. Thank you.

The majority of human trafficking investigations use electronic communication evidence. Therefore, this bill should be amended to include the following: Establish compulsory minimum training standards and annual certification for law-enforcement officers who deal with electronic evidence in the subject area of federal and state statutes derived from the Electronic Communications and Privacy Act. This includes electronic devices (cell phones, computers, tablets, routers, etc.), emails, text messages, private messages exchanged on apps (applications), social media sites (like Facebook), peer-to-peer file sharing, hash codes, NITs (Network Investigative Technique), IP addresses, internet routing, device IDs (phone numbers, IMSI, IMEI, TMSI, etc.), WIFI utilization, cell tower usage, cell tower emulators (Stingrays, etc.), and other forms of electronic evidence.

The Fop of Virginia supports HB 283 & HB 412. Training is the backbone of quality and professional law enforcement. We welcome this enhancement to the training of LEO’s. The FOP supports HB 750 to prohibit quotas for summons. The FOP opposes HB 870. Officer involved incidents is counterproductive for a proper and professional investigation of that specific incident if a time restriction is placed on the investigation. This bills also does not allow a provision if for instance, if the officer is incapacitated and unable to be questioned.

Internet Crimes Against Children, ICAC, officers have testified they have no training on Electronic Communications and Privacy Act law, yet all their cases deal with internet communications. My FOIA request to NOVA-ICAC confirms this. ICAC officers criminally violate Fourth Amendment ECPA statutes as follows: Officers intercept private communications by impersonating someone else or by creating an imaginary person using a picture of someone else. Illegally obtained private communications are disclosed and used at trial – felonies VA 19.2-62(A)(1,3,4), 18 USC 2511(1)(a,c,d), and identity theft 18 USC 1028. Officers unmask an anonymous online user’s identity by obtaining the suspect’s hidden IP address, then issuing a series of administrative subpoenas. This process requires a pen register warrant which they never obtain – VA 19.2-70.1-3, 18. USC 3121 The ICAC Cops Database inventories the content of people’s private computers, all without a warrant. It contains file names, IP addresses, dates and times of downloads, hash codes, and user information. This database is populated by breaking into online peer-to-peer bookkeeping files and stealing transactional records using tools like Torrential Downpour - 18 USC 2701 Hash codes are calculated from electronic communication content, are derived from content, uniquely identify or “fingerprint” content, and are entitled to the same privacy protections afforded to content of an electronic communication. Using hash codes to identify files and content a user has downloaded (child pornography) requires authorization to intercept content – felony VA 19.2-62(A)(1), 18 USC 2511(1)(a). Using hash codes beyond detecting transmission errors of a peer-to-peer stored communication system violates the Stored Communication Law - 18 USC 2701 When the ICAC database is updated, any new downloads of “bad” files are flagged and trigger an investigation. Officers use tools like Shareaza-LE to remotely break into a user’s password-protected computer at the specified IP address, searching it, downloading content without a warrant - VA 18.2-152.4(6) and 18 U.S. Code § 1030(a)(7). Since 1998, ICAC officers have illegally prosecuted over 8,100 Virginians. This totals about 25,000 felonies and 25,000 federal crimes committed by ICAC officers during these investigations and sting operations to protect imaginary children. Please train them on ECPA law so they might rescue a real child one day. Those they have illegally prosecuted should be exonerated.

Please move to report these bills out in respect and solidarity for trafficking victims. Thank you.

The Fop of Virginia supports HB 283 & HB 412. Training is the backbone of quality and professional law enforcement. We welcome this enhancement to the training of LEO’s. The FOP supports HB 750 to prohibit quotas for summons. The FOP opposes HB 870. Officer involved incidents is counterproductive for a proper and professional investigation of that specific incident if a time restriction is placed on the investigation. This bills also does not allow a provision if for instance, if the officer is incapacitated and unable to be questioned.

Hello my name is Vivian Loar and first and for most I would like to say that we are not trying to hurt the victims family's in any way, shape or form and I pray for them daily, but I oppose this bill because my son is currently serving a juvenile life sentence since the age of 17 and he has been in prison almost 24 years and I'm just asking that he has a chance to be looked at every year vs the every 3 years in this bill, because 2021 was his first hearing due to SB103 juvenile parole bill that was passed in 2020! Thank you for your time! Please vote NO!

I'm a returning citizen who has served 26 years in the Virginia Department of Corrections. I was incarcerated at the age of 17 and released on parole at the age of 43. I was originally sentenced to serve two consecutive life without parole sentences plus 29 years. I spent my entire incarceration educating, reforming, redeeming and rehabilitating myself. Once I became a better version of myself I committed myself to helping other inmates to become better versions of themselves, pro-social beings as well as spent years mentoring preparing inmates for re-entry back into society. Years before being eligible for release I vowed to spend the rest of my life giving back to my community if I was ever blessed with a second opportunity to be free in society again. Ever since being released I've spent almost every waking moment fulfilling that vow I made when I was incarcerated which is to give back to my community. I spend alot of time speaking to the youth and mentoring them. I've done so many positive things since being released, displayed a wonderful example of what rehabilitation and redemption looks like(after being told that I was once permanently incorrigible)and contributed to the truthful narrative of returning citizens being relevant. Throughout my journey in the VaDOC I've met so many other inmates who are just like me---educated, reformed, redeemed and rehabilitated. I personally know and believe that if given a second chance they would do amazing work out here in society. They would be committed to giving back to their communities and assisting us all with the solution based works to rid society off many of the social ills that leading to the harm and stagnation of our society as a whole. Passing a law, such as this one, serves no legitimate penological interest because it takes the focus off of rehabitation and would inevitably cause fully rehabilitated inmates to s remain incarcerated as a collateral consequence of an unreasonably complicated parole process. For these reasons DON'T support the passing of this bill. Thank you for your time and consideration.

My name is Angel and I like to express the frustration that families of the incarcerated are facing. I was incarcerated for 27 years and I received a conditional pardon from Governor Ralph Northam. I was a juvenile at the time I committed my crime. I serve 27 years and under the current system everyone that's under the old parole and recently past fish back and juvenile bills, everyone has nearly been incarcerated over 25 years and 30 years with spotless records of confinement. This bill what it does is continue to keep people incarcerated for life. I say this with all due respect If the Department of Correction is not to correct the state of mind and behavior of onces individual then all is left to consider is elimination. That's what this bill does. I want everyone to just think about this. Giving people false hope is not what this people deserve. Thank you and GOD Bless us all. I strongly oppose this bill.

It is bad enough that Virginia spends its money continuing to warehouse individuals especially it's black population which makes up the majority of residents in your prisons. BUT, then you have a severely misinformed legislator who wants to do more harm by adding additional barriers to parole which was abolished in 1995. Parole which is given to <1% of individuals eligible under the old law. It's starting to get ridiculous. A person has been convicted, if they've spent > 20 yrs in prison why are we requiring their transcript of conviction to be reviewed. The parole should be looking at the individual for who they are now not a conviction that doesn't change. Annual reviews are necessary. Every 3 yrs doesn't make any sense especially from a cost savings. You're holding people who have earn parole reviews. And lastly everyone will have a different opinion and it should not be one size fits all let's be unanimous. Please stop hating people and actually do something right in criminal justice reform for once. Pbi this bill

I strongly oppose this bill. The parole board is already a broken system in Virginia and has let out less than 1% of people for the purpose of "nature of the offense." To further add the stipulations in this bill will decrease the number even further. The purpose of parole is to give individuals who has rehabilitated and pose no threat to community safety an opportunity to be released. By changing the parole hearings from annually to every 3 years only stimulates the already overcrowded mass incarceration within the VADOC. And allowing the court transcription to be reviewed is the person being convicted all over again. A person going before the parole board should be viewed for who they are today and not who there were at the time of the offense. This bill is poisonous and I hope the committee votes against it.

I come to you as not only the Director of the VACFSY but as a loved one of an incarcerated individual in the VADOC. I am speaking AGAINST HB435. Not just for my loved one but for the thousands of individual's who are serving extreme harsh unconstitutional sentences in VA. Parole is an opportunity to prove you have spent your time wisely by staying out of trouble while incarcerated, furthering education, completing programs, tech training and maintaining employment. Virginia made huge strides forward in the last couple of years; slowly gaining our humanity back and remembering that we can all do better. HB435 is a distasteful attempt to take away from all that. It takes away opportunities from some very deserving individuals. This bill is not only ridiculous it goes against the basic fundamentals of the Legislative process. Rarely do you see unanimous votes required. Extending the review time from annually to every 3 years just does not make sense. I believe if Del. Wright has faith in our Governor, than he should not be concerned with tampering with the existing parole board. Our Governor is supposed to appoint a group of diverse individuals who's job is to review an applicant's incarcerated file (not their trial transcripts) to determine if that individual's release is compatible with public safety. This committee should be voting on a bill that reforms the parole board in an effective way that is transparent and clear for the public and the applicant to know exactly what is necessary to be granted parole. I firmly believe that if we could form a board made up of individual's who represents the victim(s), law enforcement, legislators, lawyers, previously incarcerated individual, a loved one of someone incarcerated, a victims advocate and a justice advocate we would make history. We would have a clear cut guideline so there would never be this unnecessary drama about if the previous board did anything wrong because there would be checks and balances . This panel would create a new code together, not unanimously but by voting just as you will today where the most votes win. If you pass HB435 it will end up COSTING TAX PAYERS MILLIONS!! Imagine the cost in obtaining and reviewing every single transcript! Come on. HB435 is unethical, uneconomical & unnecessary. It just doesn't make sense. Del. Wright...this time you are WRONG! I urge you all to VOTE AGAINST HB435!! Thank you for your time. Respectfully Jana White

Please vote no on this bill HB435 - Wright “Any discussion of potential reforms in Virginia’s parole system must start with the recognition that parole is a societal good. A decision to grant parole recognizes the successful rehabilitation of a prisoner. In other words, a parole grant is the result of the penal system (Department of Corrections) functioning as we want it to.” - from a 2021 report by law professors Bruck, Donovan and Engle and the Washington and Lee University School of Law’s “Parole Presentation Project” Virginia is one of a minority of states that offers no parole for those incarcerated after 1995 escept for juveniles and Fishback cases. Our newly elected Attorney General has stated that no person with a life sentence should be granted parole. According to a February 17, 2021 Richmond Times Dispatch article, 4,239 Virginia inmates are currently serving life sentences with the possibility of parole; 1,628 are serving life without parole; and 1,326 are serving virtual life sentences of 50 years or more. In all, the number of Virginia inmates serving life has increased 90% from 1970 to 2020, according to the Times. Is this level of incarceration really in our Commonwealth’s best interest? Should a parole board make it ever more difficult for deserving prisoners to be released and given a second chance to become productive, taxpaying members of the labor force? who have been infraction-free for decades and have demonstrated thoroughly changed behavior? We need an active and open parole board offering appropriate releases for deserving inmates, and in light of the escalating medical and other costs of incarcerating a growing number of elderly and infirm people behind bars who have “aged out of crime.”

House Bill 435 I vote NO. to change the parole bill for unanimously voting. There always has to be some yays and some Nays... you can't make it like a jury duty where everyone has to agree because some of them people that don't agree or afraid to stand up.

I am writing to strongly oppose HB 435 Parole Board Powers and Duties. There are over 2,500 "Old Law" parole eligible people behind bars in Virginia. Many have gone through the parole process more than 15 times. The parole board of recent years has been granting parole to less than 6% of those eligible to apply. To require the decision to grant parole be agreed to unanimously by the board members is condemning them to never receiving parole. This in practice abolishes parole before 1995 as well as after 1995. This is unconscionable. Added to this travesty, the bill only makes them eligible to apply every 3 years instead of every year as it is currently. Please do the only just and humane thing and VOTE NO against HB 435.

One reason the rate of incarceration in Virginia is incredibly high is that parole has been restricted for many years. There are persons being held prisoner, especially older persons who could be moved out of prison immediately if not for overly restrictive parole policies. Please vote NO on HB 435. This bill would only further restrict parole. Instead, please work to *expand* parole. Mandate that the Parole Board meet more often, that they hear an application from each eligible person every year (OR MORE frequently), and that they consider (as their main consideration) whether the applicant would present any danger to society. The Virginia Parole Board must help to move persons OUT of incarceration; we cannot afford to let so many of our community members remain incarcerated! Few applicants for parole could be considered "dangerous" to society; get them OUT of our expensive carceral facilities. Any parole board member who tries to deny parole to eligible applicants for reasons other than "danger to society" should be immediately replaced. Virginia cannot afford to keep restricting parole.

I am writing to ask that the committee vote against HB435. While the percentage of inmates granted parole in Virginia in 2021 was already abysmal, this egregious bill seeks to keep even more people in prison for longer durations of time. Bills like this do not serve the purpose of keeping violent criminals off the streets; they create seemingly hopeless situations for people who have made positive changes and are more than capable of being productive members of society. We cannot continue to warehouse human beings.

This is so absurd, there are people who have been incarcerated since teenagers for non life taking crimes and have drastic changes that deserve a chance at parole and for it to change to every 3 years is ridiculous!!! What if it was your family member? Vote NO

Good evening, I am writing to ask that you please block HB435 in regards to parole. Virginia has been bogged down since the 90s relentlessly in regards to incarceration since we have all but eliminated parole in it’s entirety. I ask that you please stop passing bills that make it harder for people to not only have second chances, but to return home to those that love & need them. Right now in the state of VA there are over 4,000 inmates that are serving life sentences. That’s 1 in every 7 offenders. Now that Chadwick Dotson (who was one of the judges who sentenced inmates to death for the first time in years) is leading the board—Justice is a far cry from what this state serves. Again, please vote against HB435. Respectfully, Leticia Taylor

My Husband and I oppose this Bill. My husband is incarcerated in Sussex II. He has been there 24 years this month. It is not fair to the inmates that follow the rules and are model inmates to have to wait 3 years to see the parole board again if denied. My Husband Jason Gregory will still continue to follow all of the rules of course but why continue to waste money keeping a model inmate incarcerated for another 3 years when you can review his actions and behavior after a year if denied. Of course you need to review the case as to why a person was sent to prison in the first place. But do not make them wait for another 3 years for a decision. Some people deserve second chances. You can see by their institutional record by their behavior and actions while being incarcerated if they deserve to be released. Thank you for your time

HB 493: Opposed by the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police. Violates the confidentiality of employee records of law enforcement officers and puts the safety of the officers and their families at risk, and unfairly denies a right to law enforcement officers that other public employees are afforded. HB 1142: Opposed by the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police, Creates an undue burden on officers to collect data that can result in the unlawful detention of an individual stopped by law enforcement. This is an unfunded mandate on law enforcement agencies and creates a database of questionable value.

One of the most effective ways to build community trust in the police is through transparency and accountability. Because the police are public servants who have the ability to use deadly force, community members should have the ability to ensure that complaints are being handled appropriately. We should also be able to monitor whether officers are costing tax payers significant amounts of money in legal fees due to such complaints. I ask that you support this important legislation.

The goal of FOIA is to ensure that “the affairs of government are not intended to be conducted in an atmosphere of secrecy since at all times the public is to be the beneficiary of any action taken at any level of government.” Va Code. 2.2-3700. The police, who enforce the government rules with force and interact with minority communities more than most government entities, need to be acting in the open the most of any government agency. Allowing the public to access police disciplinary records is the first step toward trust and bridging the divide between the police and the communities that they serve. When the public can see how the investigations are being done and what the outcomes are, they can begin to understand how the police operate and have enough knowledge to advocate for improvements. The police will know that their investigations are open to the public, incentivizing them to behave appropriately and respectfully to the communities they serve. All communities deserve to feel safe and secure, and confident in their police departments. They deserve to know who is policing them, which police officers in their neighborhoods have been disciplined for misconduct, and what really happens when they make complaints against police officers who have harmed them. This bill is a small step in allowing for that kind of transparency and trust.

Comments Document

My name is Joseph Carter, and I am the 58th wrongfully convicted person in Virginia to be exonerated. I served 27 years in prison for a murder I did not commit, and I am a victim of former Norfolk City Detective Robert Glenn Ford. I am writing in strong support of HB 493 by Delegate Mullin, because not one more person should spend a day behind bars due to unchecked police misconduct. HB 493 will help prevent wrongful convictions, exonerate other innocents currently in prison, and detect victims we don’t even know about yet – while providing the public oversight necessary to cull bad officers from the ranks once and for all.

This is why I support HB493 and ask our legislators to do the same. The police often push back against community oversight by arguing that community members do not know about police investigations and how the police operate. The first step toward allowing community members to gain that knowledge is for the police to be transparent about what they do. A lack of knowledge about how the police operate cannot be an excuse to refuse community oversight if the police are actively denying access to that knowledge. Transparency of disciplinary records will allow the community to have the foundation of understanding to effectively supervise their police departments. - The public cannot have trust in police who want to hide how they investigate other officers within their own departments by refusing to release disciplinary records. There can be no assurance or faith that investigations of police misconduct are thorough, fair, or serious, or that any disciplinary action that may result properly addresses the misconduct. - Allowing the public to access police disciplinary records is the first step toward trust and bridging the divide between the police and the communities that they serve. When the public can see how the investigations are being done and what the outcomes are, they can begin to understand how the police operate and have enough knowledge to advocate for improvements. The police will know that their investigations are open to the public, incentivizing them to behave appropriately and respectfully to the communities they serve.

True police transparency is critical if we are to cultivate a truly safe, just, and humane society. That means that ANY and EVERY police interaction with the public should be 1) recorded; and 2) be able to be examined, and - if necessary - followed up on. HB 493 is a strong step in that direction. I respectfully urge you to pass it forthwith. We can’t afford to delay improving on this issue any longer. Thank you in advance for any consideration.

I am writing in support of HB 493 making police disciplinary records available by FOIA request. Transparency: - The goal of FOIA is to ensure that “the affairs of government are not intended to be conducted in an atmosphere of secrecy since at all times the public is to be the beneficiary of any action taken at any level of government.” Va Code. 2.2-3700. The police, who enforce the government rules with force and interact with minority communities more than most government entities, need to be acting in the open the most of any government agency. After all, two amendments of the constitutional bill of rights are dedicated to trying to stop the police from overuse of their expansive power. Yet, they choose to act in secret by almost never releasing disciplinary records. By refusing to do so, they act in secret and do not allow the communities they both police and serve to know or understand what they are doing, practicing their immense power in the dark. HB 2196 will bring light to the activities of the police and allow the public to be educated on how the police operate. - The police often push back against community oversight by arguing that community members do not know about police investigations and how the police operate. The first step toward allowing community members to gain that knowledge is for the police to be transparent about what they do. A lack of knowledge about how the police operate cannot be an excuse to refuse community oversight if the police are actively denying access to that knowledge. Transparency of disciplinary records will allow the community to have the foundation of understanding to effectively supervise their police departments. Trust - The public cannot have trust in police who want to hide how they investigate other officers within their own departments by refusing to release disciplinary records. There can be no assurance or faith that investigations of police misconduct are thorough, fair, or serious, or that any disciplinary action that may result properly addresses the misconduct. - Allowing the public to access police disciplinary records is the first step toward trust and bridging the divide between the police and the communities that they serve. When the public can see how the investigations are being done and what the outcomes are, they can begin to understand how the police operate and have enough knowledge to advocate for improvements. The police will know that their investigations are open to the public, incentivizing them to behave appropriately and respectfully to the communities they serve. Community: - Communities across Virginia have been disproportionately impacted by policing and police misconduct. Communities of color, LGTBQ+ communities, and people with disabilities have all born severe consequences brought by being targeted by police misconduct and exposure to the criminal legal system. These communities deserve to feel safe and secure, and confident in their police departments like everyone else. They deserve to know who is policing them, which police officers in their neighborhoods have been disciplined for misconduct, and what really happens when they make complaints against police officers who have harmed them. Showing Up For Racial Justice — Historic Triangle Chapter Williamsburg, Virginia

Comments Document

The VA Innocence Coalition (Innocence Project at UVA School of Law, Innocence Project, and Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project) supports HB493 because it will help detect and prevent wrongful convictions caused by police misconduct, while promoting transparency and accountability, which will improve trust between law enforcement and the communities they police. Full transparency of all complaints will help the public see that misconduct is appropriately addressed within police agencies, provide complete data to identify patterns or red flags, and ensure agencies are not incentivized to hide records by improperly “unsustaining” a complaint. HB493 is smart for taxpayers, who won't have to foot the bill for large civil settlements due to misconduct wrongful conviction lawsuits, or for wrongful conviction compensation. And it is good for the vast majority of officers who protect and serve with professionalism, and who are unfairly tarnished by the pervasive misconduct of a minority of their colleagues. That's why at least 13 states already provide public access to all disciplinary records, including Florida and Ohio.

I am writing in support HB 493. The goal of FOIA is to ensure that “the affairs of government are not intended to be conducted in an atmosphere of secrecy since at all times the public is to be the beneficiary of any action taken at any level of government.” Va Code. 2.2-3700. The police, who enforce the government rules with force and interact with minority communities more than most government entities, need to be acting in the open the most of any government agency. After all, two amendments of the constitutional bill of rights are dedicated to trying to stop the police from overuse of their expansive power. Yet, they choose to act in secret by almost never releasing disciplinary records. By refusing to do so, they act in secret and do not allow the communities they both police and serve to know or understand what they are doing, practicing their immense power in the dark. HB 2196 will bring light to the activities of the police and allow the public to be educated on how the police operate. The police often push back against community oversight by arguing that community members do not know about police investigations and how the police operate. The first step toward allowing community members to gain that knowledge is for the police to be transparent about what they do. A lack of knowledge about how the police operate cannot be an excuse to refuse community oversight if the police are actively denying access to that knowledge. Transparency of disciplinary records will allow the community to have the foundation of understanding to effectively supervise their police departments. Trust The public cannot have trust in police who want to hide how they investigate other officers within their own departments by refusing to release disciplinary records. There can be no assurance or faith that investigations of police misconduct are thorough, fair, or serious, or that any disciplinary action that may result properly addresses the misconduct. Allowing the public to access police disciplinary records is the first step toward trust and bridging the divide between the police and the communities that they serve. When the public can see how the investigations are being done and what the outcomes are, they can begin to understand how the police operate and have enough knowledge to advocate for improvements. The police will know that their investigations are open to the public, incentivizing them to behave appropriately and respectfully to the communities they serve. Communities across Virginia have been disproportionately impacted by policing and police misconduct. Communities of color, LGTBQ+ communities, and people with disabilities have all born severe consequences brought by being targeted by police misconduct and exposure to the criminal legal system. These communities deserve to feel safe and secure, and confident in their police departments like everyone else. They deserve to know who is policing them, which police officers in their neighborhoods have been disciplined for misconduct, and what really happens when they make complaints against police officers who have harmed them.

There is no question that the occupation of Police Officer is very challenging in so many ways. However, that does not the negate the need for there to be transparency and openness regarding officers' work histories. Few other occupations can have such a direct and serious impact on the lives of all the parties involved. The more information that is gathered and shared, the greater the opportunity to address problems, prevent problems, and serve us in the community.

As a resident of James City County, I write to express my support for HB493. I support this bill because it promotes law enforcement accountability and builds public trust. By providing public access to law enforcement disciplinary records, the bill gives the public confidence that our law enforcement officers are doing their jobs correctly--with fairness and equity regardless of the situation, and according to their own procedures. In this regard, it is crucial that the public have access to records of all completed investigations -- both where the allegations were substantiated and where they were found unsubstantiated. Access to both types of records is necessary not only to ensure transparency and accountability by law enforcement agencies, but also to help the public understand the pressures faced by law enforcement officers as they execute their responsibilities on a daily basis. Thank you for your consideration.

I write in support of Delegate Mullin's HB493. The public cannot have trust or faith in the outcomes of internal investigations when police departments refuse to release disciplinary records regarding their investigations into their fellow officers' conduct. Without transparency, there can be no assurance or faith that investigations of police misconduct are thorough or fair, or that any disciplinary action properly addresses the misconduct. Making police disciplinary materials public will make it harder for problematic officers to go unpunished. Reducing police misconduct must remain a priority--for both civilians and law enforcement--in Virginia. Please vote YES.

The Virginia Sheriffs Association opposes this bill. The bill unreasonably targets law enforcement by requiring disclosure of personnel information for law enforcement officers while every other public employee remains protected.

The Fop of Virginia supports HB 283 & HB 412. Training is the backbone of quality and professional law enforcement. We welcome this enhancement to the training of LEO’s. The FOP supports HB 750 to prohibit quotas for summons. The FOP opposes HB 870. Officer involved incidents is counterproductive for a proper and professional investigation of that specific incident if a time restriction is placed on the investigation. This bills also does not allow a provision if for instance, if the officer is incapacitated and unable to be questioned.

Comments Document

This is bad legislation. Please see the attached article regarding factors affecting recall following critical or traumatic events. In summary the article represents information from a study that suggests that recall of minute details following an officer involved shooting or other traumatic event may be impaired due to the officers focus at the time of the event. This legislation appears to intend to require officers to immediately and fully recall every detail of a use of force encounter, without being able to review video camera footage that may have been recorded during the event or other available evidence, in an attempt to discredit the involved officer should they inaccurately report any aspect of the event and then after ample rest recall additional or different details.

I want them to understand that I had to learn the sad way that it's nothing to help our disabled adult community in the cases of them going missing. They have to wait 24 to 48 hrs. To be looked for. My son Andre Grady went missing and several times I tried to get the police to search but was told because of his age they couldn't, he was 31. Even after finding his abandoned wheelchair with the seat belt cut , they still wouldn't look. We later formed our own search party and found my son, deceased shoved in a crawl space of a home. My son was alive the first day I reported him missing. He laid there by himself until his injuries took over the next day. As a disabled person trying to live a normal life things might happen, but to think 24 to 48 hrs is a long time and critical time, for nobody to look for you

.

Speaking on behalf of my son Andre Grady 31 year disabled who went missing and later found decreased

Speaking on behalf of my son Andre Grady

I support this bill

HB 493: Opposed by the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police. Violates the confidentiality of employee records of law enforcement officers and puts the safety of the officers and their families at risk, and unfairly denies a right to law enforcement officers that other public employees are afforded. HB 1142: Opposed by the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police, Creates an undue burden on officers to collect data that can result in the unlawful detention of an individual stopped by law enforcement. This is an unfunded mandate on law enforcement agencies and creates a database of questionable value.

This entire code needs to be abolished. It only generates more work for law enforcement without any funding to off-set the amount of time consumed to collect the data. The data doesn't take into consideration that officers are not only policing the residents of the jurisdiction they work in, but also people from other localities and even states, so any comparison of data to the localities demographics is in error to begin with. Even comparison with data statewide doesn't take into consideration that law enforcement also deals with people from other states.