Hi, I’d just like to submit comment regarding presumption for bail. My life was turned upside down in March of 2015 after 6mo. of having recently moved to Virginia. As a graduate of Michigan State University, and a prior upstanding citizen of Michigan, and later Texas I’ve worked tirelessly to build a career my family would be proud of. After having done this, and choosing to move to VA to more closer to family and have more comfortable weather. I was harassed by a Norfolk City Police officer after not being able to find a $2 Parking Ticket Stub. I was respectful, but was met w/ aggression from the start. I didn’t have a prior criminal history, then. But, the actions of this officer created one for me simply because of my confusion, crying from fear, and asking “Where did I have a warrant?” [Given I’d never been pulled over in the city he thought he saw that I had “something”] From there after researching w/ his dispatch it was found to not be my record. Though, my car was searched and I never initially committed an offense. I believe due to having a temporary tag, and having my Out Of State liscense that expire 1 day before prompted a parking attendant to call the police.. nothing else made sense. I wondered if it were normal procedure. I was in a business suit coming from an interview (not that it should matter), but nothing of my limited exchange in her asking for my ID to send me a bill prompted for the police to be called. Even they asked if I’d gotten smart w/ the attendant. All of this was such complete waste of tax payers money for that to have ever been proper. But, I was still “booked”, because as the officer stated: “If I’d let him do his job, I’d have been on my way” I asked, for what? He stated: “Disorderly Conduct” From there I felt like I was being abducted lawfully. I was released on my own recognizance but was still traumatized. I missed my court date for having 2 jobs, received a new court date at my request. The case was “Nolle Proseque” [I thought this meant dismissed] - It remained on my record not knowing I had to apply for it to be expunged. The officer mysteriously “retired” While I was left for future if derailment, ruined reputation and multiple instances of manifest injustice simply for not knowing and it not being explained until years later — I NEEDE TO APPEAL FOR EXUNGEMENT. I was so hurt and confused by this I questioned whether I should report it. But, eventually decided to do so a few days later because it was so bizarre and because I refused to pay a $500 ticket for harassment. Given my limited interaction with the law I truly did not know what to do at the time. The Moral Of The Story: Nobody should have to sit in jail simply because they don’t have anyone local to advocate for them; and or they do not have the money for jail. Or, lose their job or housing or unable to obtain housing due to what Virginia believes is normal to hold someone based on a subjective interaction where an individuals history does not warrant it. This interaction also caused me to suffer abuse in being thought of as a criminal to being accused of theft. I believe if this interaction hadn’t accrued I’d have been treated more humanely as I had in the rest of my 33yrs of life prior in TEXAS and MICHIGAN.

Vote NO on HB1365.

HB1365: I strongly oppose this bill. Virginia made a huge step forward in protecting the rights of all Virginia residents by restoring the presumption of innocence for people accused of crimes by eliminating presumptions against bail. This bill is a step backwards and erodes personal liberty. HB1380, 1445 & 1703: I oppose all these bills on the same grounds. Unnecessary traffic stops needlessly endanger Virginians and are a waste public of resources.

Distinguished Committee Members, I am writing this comment in opposition to HB1365. This bill would restore presumptions against bail if passed and bring back an ineffective and unjust system of holding suspects in detention simply because of the crime they are accused of. This bill would also strip the ability of duly appointed judges to consider the complex factors that go into administering bail and propagates the idea that politicians know better in these sorts of judicial cases. Thank you.

HB1830, HB1703 These items have proven to be a danger to the public. Thank you to Del Campbell and Del Durant for bringing this before the committee. Please protect the public and pass it. HB1365 Some heinous crimes should be kept locked up for the protection of the public. Please protect the public and pass it.

Comments Document

Statement in Opposition of HB 1380 Attached.

Valerie Price Newport News HB 1380 Hello, I am writing to give information why I am against this bill. The data shows that Black and Brown people are stopped more often than anyone else during the stops. When people are targeted, nothing good can come from these interactions. These stops are unjust and unnecessary and will likely have negative impacts. It is very different if there is a major reason for the stop such as speeding or reckless driving, but for very minor reasons I don’t think the pretextual stops should be a priority. Please vote against this bill. Without this bill, officers will have more time for more vital situations. Please vote NO.

HB 1380 would reinstate pretextual stops that have disproportionately devastated our communities for decades. Why are we using our resources to reinstate failed policies? As a citizen, I'm tired of having to fight the same battles over and over again. We face a shortage of police to fight real crime and this legislation will not help them at all. It will give those who would abuse their roles ammunition to abuse anyone they harbor prejudice against – but I guess you know that. Do the right thing and vote this bad idea down. Eileen Engel

Stop HB1380. Stopping motor vehicles for violations that can be fixed and don't cause any harm to the public, result in the use of force. There are less measures that can be taken to prevent people from these types of actions.

Vote NO on HB1380, 1445, and 1703.

HB1365: I strongly oppose this bill. Virginia made a huge step forward in protecting the rights of all Virginia residents by restoring the presumption of innocence for people accused of crimes by eliminating presumptions against bail. This bill is a step backwards and erodes personal liberty. HB1380, 1445 & 1703: I oppose all these bills on the same grounds. Unnecessary traffic stops needlessly endanger Virginians and are a waste public of resources.

Good afternoon, I strongly oppose all 3 of these similar bills increasing the number of small infractions that a driver/pedestrian can be detained and cited for. I believe this change will result in less safety and respect for officers as community members may feel harassed or targeted with minor infractions. This change will open the door to greater discrimination against people of color who are already targeted at higher numbers for traffic stops. As a conservative with family members who were in law enforcement I strongly believe we need to support laws that increase transparency, equal policing and community policing which will result in a safer environment for our officers and more community respect for the police force. These bills do not meet that standard and I ask you to vote NO. These bills set up the opportunity for increased discrimination through profiling of drivers for traffic stops on minute infractions. The opportunity for negative community interactions will increase greatly if any of these bills are passed. Please vote no on HB1380, HB1445 and HB1703

Virginia has a well documented history of how traffic citations, etc. are used disproportionately to target Black and Brown populations. The rationale and data were presented in a prior General Assembly session; legislation was passed to prohibit this. Allowing "pretextual policing" didn't keep Virginia safer. It just perpetuates the injustice that is created due to implicit bias. Virginia must continue to make our criminal justice system more just. We must not reverse the gains that have been made in the past several years. See https://youtu.be/pLC_iWeA3zE for details about the negative impact of pretextual policing.

HB1830, HB1703 These items have proven to be a danger to the public. Thank you to Del Campbell and Del Durant for bringing this before the committee. Please protect the public and pass it. HB1365 Some heinous crimes should be kept locked up for the protection of the public. Please protect the public and pass it.

I oppose HB1380, HB1445, and HB1703 as they would move the Commonwealth backward on the great gains we have made this decade in criminal justice reform.

I am Lawrence Diehl, attorney in Richmond. I have testified on family law legislation for over 30 years before the GA and have practiced family law for over 48 years, co- author of Va Family Law Treatise and have done approximately 108 appeals to the Va Ct of Appeals. I support HB 1385- the current statute regarding appeals of interlocutory orders passed last year inadvertently omitted the limit of appeals in domestic relations to FINSL orders which has been Virginia law for decades. We need to restore the law to appeals only of final orders only, otherwise this will open up a floodgate of appeals of pendente lite orders, many by angry or disgruntled parties just to delay divorce proceedings which would delay divorce proceedings by 9-12 months. This would be a terrible result, especially the lack of finality of proceedings which is not in the best interests of families or the public interest in Virginia. The Coalition favors this bill. I personally worked with Sen. Surovell and legislative services in drafting this part of the bill. It is greatly needed as there already us pending in the Virginia Court of Appeals a case attempting to appeals a temporary support order- Choi v Chou - and a ruling on the issue of whether the Virginia Court of Appeals has jurisdiction over such orders is pending. The law needs to be restored to the pre-January 1, 2022 law and statute (17.1-405) by limiting family law appeals to final orders Further, I have reviewed the report and data leading to the expanded jurisdiction of the Virginia Court of Appeals in order to provide adequately judges and resources for that Court. The studies did not address at all the flood of interlocutory appeals in family law cases as that was not anticipated by the rules study group. If temporary orders can be appealed, that will create a huge volume of appealed cases and clog the Virginia Court of Appeals with a volume not expected and that will create a lack of judges to address such additional appeals. I strongly ask for the enactment of HB 1385.

This bill makes no distinction between contact and non-contact sex crimes. For rape, this seems logical. However, 95% of all people convicted of sex crimes are non-contact. ICAC posts pictures of women online and pimps them, then male officers impersonate the women pictured and claim to be a 15-year-old girl. The officer animates his female character like a realistic cartoon. There is no STD transmission with a cartoon character. Possession of CP also is non-contact. Defendants are innocent until proven guilty, so how can you violate HIPAA laws until they are convicted?

Here is a written plea from my client. 2 other women were also assaulted by the same man around the same time. He is awaiting trial. He refuses to submit to a simple blood test. My client has essentially been turned into a shut in from this assault, the invasive criminal justice process, and fear of having HIV. It is hard for her to discuss this face to face with breaking down. Please accept this instead— try to place yourself in her shoes, or that of her husband, child or parent. Have mercy. My Sexual Assault Experience- On the morning of May 29th, I had the horrific, life changing experience of being violently raped by an intruder in my home. Immediately after, I reported the incident to the police. I then went through the grueling task of giving evidence and testing for HIV/ STDs and hepatitis. Next, I was prescribed a cocktail of four preventative drugs for HIV, chlamydia, and trichomoniasis, and given a painful shot to prevent Gonorrhea. This process took most of the day. I was not able to shower till later that evening. The perpetrator was arrested two days later and charged with sexually assaulting two additional women. As devastating as the assault was, the aftermath has proven to be just as difficult. I was shocked and disappointed to learn that there was no law requiring the charged perpetrator to test for HIV/STDs. The HIV meds must be taken within 72 hours of exposure and do not 100 percent guarantee that you will not contract HIV. Unfortunately, the HIV meds are hard on the body and have proved to be devastating to my health. I have a medical condition that has forced me to resign from my teaching career. I have been on medical disability for the past year. I could only tolerate the HIV drugs for two of the four required weeks, due to their unpleasant side effects. Additionally, I had to hold off taking the prescribed antibiotics for the other STDs due to their side effects. The gains I had made in my recovery have been eradicated by the effects of the strong HIV meds. I now live under the looming threat of having contracted HIV and of passing it on to my husband. Additionally, I must test intermittently for all of these STDs every few months for one year. This is necessary even if a full course of the meds are taken. As a victim of sexual assault, I strongly urge you to require charged perpetrators be tested for HIV / STDs at the request of a complaining victim. Victims of sexual assault continue to be victimized by the unpleasant side effects of the meds, along with the anxiety and uncertainty of having contracted HIV for up to one year even when the meds are tolerable. These additional factors add fuel to the fire of sexual assault, making it extremely difficult to fully heal from such a heinous crime and to move forward with our lives. Please consider the mental anguish, pain, and trauma, suffered by victims of sexual assault. Our personal rights to good health, peace of mind, and a sense of closure must be upheld. Please act justly and compassionately by replacing the repealed testing law with legislation that supports the rights of sexual assault victims! I regret that I cannot attend the hearings to personally deliver my story due to poor health. I am very grateful and much indebted to Delegate Brewer and to all those who have taken up this worthy cause and are standing up for rights of sexual assault victims. My thoughts and prayers are with you for a positive outcome! Jane Doe

I’m writing to express strong opposition to this bill. We as Virginians have made progress in how we ethically police our communities and this bill aims to undo several years of progress and reform. As an constituent, I am requesting our elected officials oppose this bill. Vote NO

Or, lose their job or housing or unable to obtain housing due to what Virginia believes is normal to hold someone based on a subjective interaction where an individuals history does not warrant it. This interaction also caused me to suffer abuse in being thought of as a criminal to being accused of theft. I believe if this interaction hadn’t accrued I’d have been treated more humanely as I had in the rest of my 33yrs of life prior in TEXAS and MICHIGAN. Nobody becomes disorderly or a thief at 30something years old with a career they’ve established at the top of their profession as an HR Professional for top Department Of Defense Contractors, all ended. Reconsider.

Vote NO on HB1380, 1445, and 1703.

My name is Morgan Wilds. I'm here on behalf of Marijuana Justice, a partner in the CannaJustice Coalition. We oppose HB 1445. This would be a complete step backward with progress and our legalization efforts.

HB1365: I strongly oppose this bill. Virginia made a huge step forward in protecting the rights of all Virginia residents by restoring the presumption of innocence for people accused of crimes by eliminating presumptions against bail. This bill is a step backwards and erodes personal liberty. HB1380, 1445 & 1703: I oppose all these bills on the same grounds. Unnecessary traffic stops needlessly endanger Virginians and are a waste public of resources.

Good afternoon, I strongly oppose all 3 of these similar bills increasing the number of small infractions that a driver/pedestrian can be detained and cited for. I believe this change will result in less safety and respect for officers as community members may feel harassed or targeted with minor infractions. This change will open the door to greater discrimination against people of color who are already targeted at higher numbers for traffic stops. As a conservative with family members who were in law enforcement I strongly believe we need to support laws that increase transparency, equal policing and community policing which will result in a safer environment for our officers and more community respect for the police force. These bills do not meet that standard and I ask you to vote NO. These bills set up the opportunity for increased discrimination through profiling of drivers for traffic stops on minute infractions. The opportunity for negative community interactions will increase greatly if any of these bills are passed. Please vote no on HB1380, HB1445 and HB1703

Virginia has a well documented history of how traffic citations, etc. are used disproportionately to target Black and Brown populations. The rationale and data were presented in a prior General Assembly session; legislation was passed to prohibit this. Allowing "pretextual policing" didn't keep Virginia safer. It just perpetuates the injustice that is created due to implicit bias. Virginia must continue to make our criminal justice system more just. We must not reverse the gains that have been made in the past several years. See https://youtu.be/pLC_iWeA3zE for details about the negative impact of pretextual policing.

I oppose HB1380, HB1445, and HB1703 as they would move the Commonwealth backward on the great gains we have made this decade in criminal justice reform.

My name is Betty Wade Coyle and I am a retired child advocate. I am writing against this bill . HB1493 is anything but in the best interest of children. It is a bill that puts the parents right before the children's rights and has been sponsored on behalf of the father's rights movement. What it does do is create a presumption that "the court shall, upon the request of either party, assure a minor child of frequent and continuing contact with both parents so as to maximize the amount of time the minor child spends with each parent," Then the court can consider the exceptions that involve the best interests of the children. Basically what this bill does is put the parents' right before the children's rights in every case. Additionally, this bill is unnecessary because courts currently can order maximum time with both parents if that is determined to be in the best interest of the children. I respectfully request that you oppose this bill (HB1493). Thank you for your consideration.

As someone who has had to navigate the family law courts for the last 6+ years reading this bill brings literal tears to my eyes. What a step back this would be for and already broken system. My children’s other parent has an extensive criminal background that includes assaults, drug and alcohol related charges and 2 convictions of DUI. He was also charged with domestic violence against myself for beating me and dragging me around our house in front of our then 3 year old children. Because of Virginia’s first offender treatment program my abuser has no record of an official conviction of domestic abuse. Unfortunately, that wasn’t the only incident. Like many victims of abuse, I hid a lot. I would stay home until the bloody lips and bruises healed or cover them with long sleeves and pants. I finally left for good, but the abuse continues through the children and through the court system. They beg not to go, they cry, they come home with injuries, bruises, terrible stories, and fear. Their spirit is broken. No one listens to us. No one has protected us. I sometimes find myself regretting leaving because now I cannot protect my children when they are court ordered to go to their other parents house. I would have rather taken the abuse and been able to protect them. It is already extremely difficult for safe parents to fight for their children’s rights. The focus needs to remain on the children’s best interest. Not the parents. The courts already have the power to grant maximum custody time to each parent based on best interest of the child factors. There is already a lack of protection for children. Laws are already outdated for abuse. This bill makes if even more difficult for safe parents and their children to be protected. Look at the research. Putting a limit on time abuse can be considered? Only considering what falls under the outdated legal definition of abuse? This would be detrimental to the child who is screaming they don’t want to go to the other parent because they aren’t safe. It mutes their already muffled voices in this incredibly broken system. Most of the families in the court system have a background of high conflict and complex issues that requires knowledge of such. Most of the families that would benefit from a bill like this settle before getting to court. HB1493 puts a one size fits all approach to a topic that is FAR from a one size fits all. Again, the court already has the power to grant the maximum custody they see fit for both parents. This bill would cause an incredible amount of burden and harm to the already struggling families that are trying to navigate through the family court system to prove the best interest of the child. For the families and especially the rights of children, please vote NO for HB1493.

I'm a single mother of a 10 year old boy (named Cole). My child was thriving in my primary custody for most of his life, getting good grades, happy and healthy. In 2020, I lost primary custody during a custody trial (verbal only) when my lawyer tried to present evidence to support my ex-husband was alcoholic and the court dismissed the evidence since it was Covid and documents were supposed to be shared 10 days before trial and my lawyers missed that change in process and judge didn’t accept it afterwards and shut down the topic when it was brought up during verbal trial. I had primary custody from 2016 - 2020. My ex-husband got a DUI (driving under the influence) in May 2021 and guilty conviction in Feb. 2022, in fact the guardian of my son was the one that discovered the arrest. Though my child was not in the car that time when he got arrested, the DUI report stated he had a blood alcohol level of 0.17. Please note that my son was dropped off 4 hours before he got a DUI. My child (at the time was 8) did convey to his guardian ad litem in 2021 that his dad has driven drunk multiple times while he is in the car and gave blow by blow details of how he closed his eyes in the back seat hoping his daddy doesn't crash, but the guardian stated that I coached my son with no basis to tell him this and never gave that info my son disclosed back to the judge. The judge nor the guardian never put into any consideration about changing 50/50 shared parenting time from the new custody order from 2020 after guilty DUI conviction which suggests callousness in regards to my child's safety and well-being. Even though the judge changed legal custody in 2021 with me making final decision authority due to his constant harassing and hostile behavior towards me with co-parenting. At this point in time, VA courts are already awarding 50/50 to fathers, even when they clearly pose a safety risk to someone with alcohol and verbal abuse and this bill would make it automatic, even worse for moms and kids like us. If this bill passes, then I wouldn’t have had any chance to have primary custody even though I no longer do now. This bill would negate the issues of my son’s father’s long standing alcohol and verbal abuse and just focus on his parental rights not the child safety factors. I feel the courts states that I married this person with alcohol abuse I should just accept that father has rights and not think about my child safety. Finally, passing this bill, would also just put a blanket generalization on custody cases when each custody case should be taken on direct evidence and a case by case basis. Thank you for your time to read this testimony.

The provisions in the proposed HB1493 are bad policy – bad for children, families, and courts. The proposals put forward in HB1493 are not supported by valid research. Please vote NO on this bill. The vast majority of child custody arrangements (approximately 90%) are settled out of court. The small percentage that must be adjudicated typically involve complex problems, including abuse. Research shows that due to trauma, lack of resources, limited access to adequate legal representation, bias, and a number of other disadvantaging factors, survivors of domestic abuse who are parents already typically struggle in custody litigation to reach the necessary burden to prove abuse or risk and protect their children from a dangerous ex-partner. HB1493 would make staying safe even more challenging than it already is for such parents and children at-risk of harm. HB1493 would change VA child custody law to automatically grant dangerous parents 50% custody (or as close to it as possible) before the court could consider what is in the best interest of the child as it currently does. The essential purpose of custody decisions is to ensure the best interests of the child, not the parents. Courts do so by considering many factors, including the safety of the child, the child’s relationship with each parent, and many other factors that are important for the child. Courts are already able to, and often do, grant maximum custody time to each parent when they deem such an order appropriate for the individual child; equal or near equal custody is already a frequent outcome of custody litigation and settlement. This bill would make it even more difficult for safe parents to keep their children with them and out of harm’s way, would reduce the court’s discretion to do what is best for children, and would increase protracted litigation for struggling families. On behalf of VAs children and families, please vote NO on this dangerous and unnecessary bill.

It is important to reject HB1493. Why? It vandalizes a child's right to parenting that meets the child's best interests. The existing factors-based determination our courts use is tailor made to the undulating landscape where custody and visitation decisions are made especially when a parent has spurious motives and tendencies toward domestic abuse . This bill would effectively hijack the existing multifaceted approach to these decisions and at the same time bring into being a bill that can be weaponized by an abusive parent to the detriment of vulnerable children. The complex nexus of domestic violence and the juvenile and domestic relations court cannot be over emphasized and that is particularly why the House should not deem to tamper with the Code where if it is not broke do not attempt to fix it. Reject HB 1493 and let the court do its job based on extant statutory law.

Contrary to the text of HB1493, the provisions of this bill go directly against the best interests of hundreds of children with an abusive parent. The language in this bill sets a dangerous and inaccurate precedent that frequent contact with both parents for all children is best. The court has a duty to approach each case with an objective review of evidence presented that determines the best interest of the child. Requiring that each case is approached with the presumption that frequent contact with both parents is best threatens this ability. Further, it relies on a severely insufficient legal definition of abuse and goes against current research in child psychology and expert recommendations for fostering a healthy environment for children. A comprehensive synopsis of family custody cases found "“best interests” considerations priorities the maintenance of perpetrator/child relationships, and thus “abuser’s rights” over victim safety. Judicial officers are not experts in domestic violence and they can only make decisions on the basis of the evidence before them, the assessments made by the “experts” likely play an important role in best interest considerations. Of concern is current research that calls into serious question the expertise of these “experts” when it comes to proceedings involving allegations of coercively controlling violence." Download here: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/5/1/14 Please vote no and refrain from reconsidering again until the safety of children with an abusive parent is prioritized and enacted into law. This bill prioritizes parents rights before securing the best interests of children. Voting yes on this bill is a grave act of violence against hundreds of children and families.

Please reject this initiative, which would result in a failure to protect the welfare of vulnerable children whose parents are abusive. The current standards of review on behalf of children',s well being offer necessary and rightful protections which should not be reduced or eliminated.

Dear Delegates: I strongly oppose any proposal that unilaterally prioritizes parental rights over the best interest of the child. Simply put this legislation is life and death to those caught in the grips of domestic violence. To date, Virginia has had twenty children murdered by a parent involved in a custody dispute. The couples who cannot come to agreement on the best interest of their child(ren) because of the dynamics of abuse desperately need sociological jurisprudence. Adding an additional layer of parental rights over the best interest of the child will ensure that Virginia judges get it wrong. These children do not get “do-overs” and their path in life is forever altered because an abusive parent was given access. Carly Sawyer (5) Starved/beaten by Father/Stepmother. Norfolk, June 2009 Sierra Ragin (15) Stabbed to death by Father. Warwick, August 2011 La’Kwan Ragin (11) Stabbed to death by Father. Warwick, August 2011 Rasheed Ragin (6) Stabbed to death by Father. Warwick, August 2011 Jesus Quintero Colon (10) Shot by Father in in murder-suicide. Accomack, December 2011 Ana E. Quintero Colon (9) Shot by Father in in murder-suicide. Accomack, December 2011 Alexis Jackson (13) Shot by Father in in murder-suicide. Fairfax, March 2012 Madison King (3) Stabbed/Carbon monoxide by Father. Hanover, January 2012 Caroline King (3) Stabbed/Carbon monoxide by Father. Hanover, January 2012 Onesha Washington (13) Shot by Father in murder-suicide. Culpeper, August 2014 Onya Washington (6) Shot by Father in murder-suicide. Culpeper, August 2014 Olivia Washington (4) Shot by Father in murder-suicide. Culpeper, August 2014 Alexis F. Kellas (9) Shot by Father in in murder-suicide. Chesterfield, June 2014 Keytrell Kelly (2) Shot by Father in in murder-suicide. Richmond, October 2014 Seth Jernigan (2) Shot by Father in in murder-suicide. Chesterfield, June 2014 Griffin Lane Palmer (17) Shot by Father in in murder-suicide. Washington, February 2014 Leah Rogers (1) Shot by Father. Chesterfield, May 2015 Tasha Jonas (11) ) Shot by Father in in murder-suicide. Norfolk, May 2015 Brooklyn Michelle Youngblood (5) Shot by Mother. Fairfax, August 2018 Sharon Youngblood (4) Shot by Mother. Fairfax, August 2018 Source: Center for Judicial Excellence: US Divorce Child Murder Data – Virginia I hope you agree that Virginia's children are worthy of this consideration. I greatly appreciate your time, thank you. Donna Sykes

Dear House of Delegates Courts of Justice Subcommittee #2 Members, Tomorrow you will be voting on HB 1493. A variation of this bill has been presented to you every year that I have closely followed the General Assembly Session, which has been since 2019, and every year it fails. I request that you please vote "no", in opposition of this bill once again. This bill stands to take precedence over the Best Interest Factors already established in Virginia Code, which is the current standard of how child custody is determined. The Commonwealth of Virginia needs to pass laws that will ensure the child's safety is the first priority in family court adjudication. A child's right to grow up in a safe and healthy home should trump a parent's right to access the child. Current law does not provide protection from parents who psychologically, emotionally, or verbally abuse their children or who use their contact time through phone and video calls to harass and take time away from the other parent. I know for a fact how seriously detrimental this treatment of a child can be due to the trauma caused in my own childhood by my father and now in my journey to protect my own child from her abusive father. The amount of money and time required to be spent to prevent, correct, and treat these childhood traumas through psychological treatment and medication could be avoided by having a professional who has completed extensive training on domestic abuse and coercive control thoroughly evaluate each parent's ability to raise a child in a psychologically healthy home. Thank you for considering my position.

Comments Document

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) urges you to support HB 1549 by Delegate Campbell to require impaired drivers to pay child support when an impaired driver causes a crash that kills a parent or guardian of a child under 18. HB 1549 is modeled after Bentley’s Law enacted in Tennessee, which makes impaired drivers pay child support to a surviving spouse or other relatives who are raising the children of victims until the children turn 18. MADD supports Bentley’s Law as long as child support payments made by impaired drivers do not replace other civil remedies sought by victims. The problem of drunk driving increased 21% from 2019 to 2020 in Virginia. The problem of drunk driving is getting worse in Virginia. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 286 people were killed in drunk driving crashes in Virginia in 2020. This is an increase of 21% from 2019, when 237 people died in drunk driving crashes. HB 1549 better ensures justice and accountability. MADD believes that passing this proposal will make people think twice before getting behind the wheel impaired. If a person makes the choice to drive impaired and kills a parent, the person will encounter another consequence for their deadly decision. To the victims of the impaired drivers, this proposal allows for another avenue of restitution to help ensure justice. Enclosed is a Q and A document on Bentley's Law implementation.

This bill has a small change from the current legislation, in that it removes the requirement that the person who is unlawfully peeping be on the property of another. This change is important because peeping can take place from adjacent property (particularly with tall buildings next to each other) and in situations between roommates. This change would make prosecution of invasive and offensive behavior unlawful in a broader range of circumstances, and helps victims who have been watched from the street, adjacent buildings or by roommates prosecute their cases.

NO- I do not support this bill! Excluding anyone is prejudice! Men/woman are working hard to change their life and you continue to strip all hope of that!

I ask that you vote "NO" to move to pass this piece of legislation into law. I feel that this is an unjust way of undoing the bill that was passed in 2020 by the previous administration to help unite families. Many inmates were given calculation sheets stating they were being released early due to the credit. Many of these families had prepared for them to be released only to find out the rug was pulled from under them at the last minute. It was absolutely cruel and disheartening not to destroy the hope and dreams of these families but now you want to ensure inmates do not receive any credit at all. Under the previous administration had this been a factor it would have never made it into law. I strongly feel that a lot is this undoing is financially motivated to line the pockets of politicians that have times to the prison system.

We should be giving incarcerated people an opportunity to better themselves in the process of working towards something that will significantly affect their future. Many of our incarcerated friends are serving ridiculously long sentences for something they did at a young age - the human brain doesn’t fully develop until a persons mid twenties. We’re talking about people who made mistakes at a young age who will never be able to show how they’ve grown - people should be given the opportunity to use our prison systems as they were originally intended: To rehabilitate and learn from their mistakes. Putting a restriction on who is able to earn their way back to a normal life is unfair and unjust

No! I’m against this bill

No. Stop this bill

No! PLEASE STOP THIS BILL

I hope you all will vote NO against this bill. My husband has been incarcerated 22 years since the age of 18. He went in as a immature kid. He has double stacked use of firearms with a felony and got 3 years each which gave a extra 6 years for his crime he already got 20 years for and has completed that "violent" time. Many have similar double stacked charges if not more for this same offense and it's not right! Please be VOTE NO FOR HB1603. Thank You!

I left a comment but the page shut down so I'm not sure if it was sent. I apologize if this is a duplicate. Please vote no to exclusions of earned time credits for the incarcerated. We need real rehabilitation not mass incarceration. These individuals are further traumatized by a broken system. When this bill was repealed it stripped hundreds of people of their right to freedom and plans they had made with their families for jobs, travel, weddings, and reunions. The lawsuits stemming from this will cost thousands of taxpayer dollars. Please reinstate what was already granted. People deserve the right to rehabilitate and earn good time. That's the whole point of the incarceration rehabilitation system is it not? By saying that inmates cannot earn good time, they're basically stating that their rehabilitation efforts are a failure. (Which they mostly are any way) take time to talk to prisoners about what really goes on behind the bars and walls of the prison system. The drugs are brought in by the guards. The guards are having sex with the inmates. There are drugs everywhere throughout the prison system, gangs, horrible violence, corruption. Inmates will not talk about what is really happening for fear of retaliation by both the institution and other inmates. We need an immense and complete overhaul of the department of corrections in Virginia. We need mental health treatment, substance use treatment and trauma treatment. Not further violence and solitary confinement and having them living in fear of being attacked 24/7.

Please vote NO on #1603. It would be so unfair to exclude persons.

I oppose this bill, for so many reasons! I believe everyone EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO EARN ESC credits no matter what the crime is because it restores Hope encourages people to take classes and work hard to improve themselves and gives them some extra reasons to rehabilitate themselves! I also am a victim of a serious crime unfortunate the man that robbed me was never charged ! But if he was I would have agreed with him earning extra credits for turning his life around! This is bad Legislation … I’m not an attorney, but a lot of you are and I don’t understand how you don’t see that this bill would open up the opportunity for so many to file lawsuits against the state of Virginia and cost taxpayers millions of dollars!

I represent the Valley Justice Coalition and we strongly oppose this bill. According to the Impact Statement for HB1603, there will be a cost of over a half million dollars EACH year in preparation for the lawsuits the bill is expected to generate. Assuming the State will lose at least some of these lawsuits, this could eventually cost taxpayers millions of dollars. As your constituents, we are appalled that you have such little regard for taxpayers' dollars. Vote NO against HB1603.

I write to ask you vote NO on HB 1603. The bill as written would unfairly affect many people who deserve an earlier release than this provides. In particular, I note that in paragraph 18 it would reduce the available sentencing credits for ANY felony “involving a firearm” – regardless of the circumstances. This is far too broad and would unjustly deny many people a chance at earlier release who pose no threat to society. It is not unusual for someone to be charged with a felony “involving a firearm” even if the firearm was NOT part of the crime at issue but, for instance, simply located in a dwelling or car where an arrest took place. Moreover, there are still a good number of felonies that are based on marijuana that involve circumstances likely to be legal in the near future. Being incarcerated and having a loved one incarcerated is emotionally, mentally and physically damaging. The current Earned Sentence Credit Bill that is active and in place now, is fair. It already disqualifies violent offenders. Serving more jail time should not be the answer. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter. Alexis Laplace Woodbridge, VA 22192

I would like for you to hear me please. I was molested at the age of 5 years old, because my mother wanted her drugs amd men more than me. I was 10 years when I started using drugs and alcohol. By 11 I was told by my grandmother where my mom was so I Hitch hike from. CHICAGO to Cleveland to find her. I dropped out of school in the 6th grade the streets taught me how to read and write. The state trooper picked me up and did a APB for my mom. When found she told them that's not my child you can do whatever you want with her. Now I'm homeless, on drugs amd my parents doesn't want me. I remember being in that bathroom when a GROWN man forced me on my knees and said to me " You're not a little girl anymore you are a grown woman. For 2 weeks in that apartment all the men had their way with me. Now I was being sexually exploited. For 31 years I lived this way. I walked around with 8 pairs of socks because I never had any shoes. My childhood was taken away from me. I can never get that back. There are so many young kids out there who can be saved save them. As of August 6th 2010 which is my date of Grace 2019 I got my High school diploma, graduated college with my associates degree in social work in 2022, I am a publisher author of 31 Years in the Desert, many accomplishments. I will never be able to have children physically this is another reason I stand and not be silent. After 31 Years of hell I walk with my head held high. Something needs to be done to the sex traffickers, not the victims. Why should we be punished with felony records, can't get housing in a neighborhood like you live in. I had to pay double rent because I had prostitution charges. Where is the justice? I hope whoever reads this finds it in their hearts to make the right decisions moving forward. Thank you Castanita Fitzpatrick A Butterfly Gets Her Wings Back LLC. 214.535.3034 abutterflygetsherwings@gmail.com

Vote NO to HB1603! The Earned Sentence Credit bill was studied, investigated, vetted & debated twice and what came from that was a law with the ability to highlight those who have taken full advantage of all programs & requirements of their incarceration & EXCEL! The disgraceful budget amendment stripped enough away. It broke people’s hearts inside and outside of the prison walls, but now this is an attempt to further punish someone who is already serving their time honorably and have made valuable changes to themselves before they knew they could get ESC, and they deserve to be credited what they worked so hard for! Do you realize this makes prison less safe by continually excluding and taking things away from people who have EARNED their good time? It is not given to them, it is EARNED. Put yourself in their shoes for one second! Imagine working hard for no reason at all other than to benefit yourself, being promised you would be rewarded when you least expected it, and then watching quietly while it is snatched away from you! They have no voice right now, but I do! They are not the sum of their worst day but the product of learned lessons through life, maturity & growth achieved while serving their time. VOTE NO!

I absolutely and unequivocally DO NOT support this bill.

Hi

I think its appalling that you are attempting to take away EARNED sentencing credits from men and women who has done their fiduciary duties to rehabilitate themselves while incarcerated. Lawmakers has got to stop singling out individuals based on their offenses and allow them to be seen and deemed rehabilitated for who they are today. The sentencing credits is not a point system given to an individual, it's a system that's earned through hard work, dedication and mindset changes in behavior over years of incarceration. I OPPOSE this bill that would attempt to remove the right for these men and women to receive credits they have earned by remaining infraction free and are not deemed a threat to public safety. Please vote NO for this bill of legislation.

ESC- is a bill that was give then pulled back at the hands of our government, our jails and prisons are overcrowded, understaffed and more over these men and women deserve to have the opportunity for less time after sentencing, DOC is the worlds second largest industry we are manufacturing Criminals more than all other countries combined yet we say we are the land of the free… I believe this bill will provide structure but also allow reduced sentences by credits earned Im in support of this bills it will not only help the incarcerated people but their families who suffer behind incarceration

Pleaae vote no. This isn't fair to no violent offenders who have rehabilitated and changed their lives completely. My husband has served nearly 25 years in the VADOC, and this will hinder his chances of coming hime early. Not everyone who receives a firearm charge is violent. If you review a lot of cases, you will see that sometimes, they were given a firearm charge because of a circumstantial event or the way the charges were filed. It's not always because they were violent people. This needs to be reviewed and reworded, if nothing else. Please, consider the people who deserve to go home, and the families that need them??? Please vote NO!??

NO

I cannot begin to express the level of intelligence and maturity of this individual but the fact that he has turned his life around speaks for itself he pushes nothing but encouragement, love, and peace into the world. I am humbly asking for his release as he does not deserve to be punished and persecuted in innocence. I can guarantee within his release he will have nothing but a heavy positive effect on those around him and the general community he deserves to live a normal life he deserves to work a job and be there for his children and grandchildren. He has served more than enough time of sufferation at the hands of the Virginia department of corrections when is enough, enough? When has a man paid his debt? Take my words and the fact that he has been reforming for the last 20 years from any negative habits or behaviors he once portrayed into consideration. Sincerely Anderson,

Vote NO to HB1603. VADOC's main goal and focus should be rehabilitation. Taking away the opportunity for incarcerated men and woman to earn reduced time for working towards being better is wrong. Some are actually taking the time to better themselves. Have families to come home to, children they have sadly missed important milestones, so many factors that make a person to strive to be better. No one knows what the full circumstances are when a person committed any crime. We as community members in the commonwealth need to be proactive in helping these men and woman get home where they belong. Let's also include the terrible language of this bill. Inmates have no access to firearms while in confinement, so where does that language apply? There ARE so MANY errors with this bill proposal. Also, you have majority of inmates who have mixed charges, so non firearm related charges are still eligible. OR does the 1 charge that is firearm related reduce to zero? I think there should be concrete clarification on all points of this bill. Until all things are clarified and written without any confusion this is a definite NO

Please Vote No & Do Not support this bill. Not all people who have been convicted are violent. It’s unfair to someone who has worked hard to turn their life around, to be denied a chance at early release..

I oppose this. I believe people deserve a second chance and should be rehabilitated so they can come home to their families

No

Thier are thousands of inmates that got a boat load of time they don't deserve, People can and do change their lives..

I DO NOT support HB 1603.

Please vote NO. If a person is behaving enough to earn good time they should be allowed to have it. Thank you

I would like you to vote no on this bill as taking away good time essentially takes away the hope of the imprisoned. It isn't ethical or right at all.

I'm writing to you all on behalf of my husband, Marcus Conrad Ingram, Inmate #1090850 in the Virginia Department of Corrections. Mr. Ingram has been incarcerated for over 17 years, having been sentenced to a total of 32 years for armed robbery with mace in 3 jurisdictions. Because he had mace, his charges of put him in the “violent offender” category, therefore he isn't eligible for Earned Sentence Credits yet, but I'm hoping this bill will be such that he qualifies. No one was seriously injured during the robberies, and while we agree that incarceration was necessary, 32 years is more than excessive. The sentencing Judge, Judge Weckstein, said he was going to “make an example of” Mr. Ingram, and sentenced him to 32 years. After his original sentence, Mr. Ingram’s lawyer filed a motion to reduce his sentence on 6/19/07, again outlining the conditions under which Mr. Ingram was suffering at the time of the crimes, to include major depressive disorder, alcohol abuse, ajd drug abuse. Mr. Ingram is extremely remorseful for his actions and can be a valuable member of society if given the chance. He's missed most of his children's lives and has certainly been humbled by his experience. He has employable skills, job offers lined up, and a stable home environment with me upon his release.

No!!!

Being the man home to his family

Please vote NO!!?? everyone deserves a second chance, and people change. Not all firearms charges are violent.

HB 1603. I’m voting no! If these inmates have been given “good time”, they should be allowed to keep it whether you stop adding to it or not. Some have worked very hard to try to get back to society, families and friends. Please don’t hinder the ones who are successfully going through their incarceration without incident! Thank you.

I think they should vote against this. This bill is hindering thousands of people from receiving their good time and getting them back home to their families whom miss and love them dearly!

Statistically speaking Virginia has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the country. However incarcerated men and women, many who are black and brown, remain imprisoned under unfathomable conditions. Despite these circumstances these same men and women have worked hard to EARN their good time by staying infraction free, participating in programs, and overall changing their lives around. Please be a voice for the preferably unheard and recognize that HB 1603 is NOT the answer to curbing violent crimes involving firearms. Vote NO today!

My fiance got sentence to 5 years in prison. He will be out in 2025. I want him to get out early for good behavior. He hasn't been in any trouble since he been in prison. I need him out & give him a chance.

Comments Document

Attached you will find my speech that I hope you will consider prior to todays meeting. Thank you.

Please, vote NO!??? Not everyone convinced of a firearm offense is violent. To categorize them all as violent, is ridiculous, and unfair. There are thousands of families who need their loved ones home. There are thousands of men and women who have been over sentenced because of a firearm charge. Please consider the men and women affected by this decision. The families torn apart, the financial burden, the incarcerated individuals who have served 20, 30, and 40 year in the VADOC, who deserves a second chance, and deserve to be reunited with their families, but are hindered from doing so, because of the language, and labeling in this bill. Please ask yourself, if this is how you would want to be labeled and treated, if you made a poor choice as, a teenager??? ... Or if your son, daughter, or loved one was locked away with no hope for 30, 40, or 50 years. ESC was earned, and taking it away from people who have earned it, is unfair, unconscionable, and cruel. Please, let our loved ones have a chance to come home?? Thank you.

Not everyone convinced of a firearm offense is violent. To categorize them all as violent, is ridiculous, and unfair. There are thousands of families who need their loved ones home. There are thousands of men and women who have been over sentenced because of a firearm charge. Please consider the men and women affected by this decision. The families torn apart, the financial burden, the incarcerated individuals who have served 20, 30, and 40 year in the VADOC, who deserves a second chance, and deserve to be reunited with their families, but are hindered from doing so, because of the language, and labeling in this bill. Please ask yourself, if this is how you would want to be labeled and treated, if you made a poor choice as, a teenager??? ... Or if your son, daughter, or loved one was locked away with no hope for 30, 40, or 50 years. ESC was earned, and taking it away from people who have earned it, is unfair, unconscionable, and cruel. Please, let our loved ones have a chance to come home??

Please vote NO FOR HB1603 - we should be including more people to have the chance to earn their way home sooner! Prison is about rehabilitation and growing and learning from past mistakes, give our loved ones the chance to show that they’ve grown! It’s called EARNED sentence credits for a reason!!!

Hello, I am one of the founders and Executive Director of Ignite Justice, a local non-profit organization that works with incarcerated individuals and their families. I’m here today to ask you to vote no to House Bill 1603, which will amend and reenact the Earned Sentence Credit. Virginia consistently has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the country. According to recidivism studies including ones conducted by the Virginia Department of Corrections, individuals with violent crimes as their most serious offense are far less likely to re-offend than non-violent. Earned good time credit can increase accountability and rehabilitation. It has been shown that incentives like increased earned good time, leads to increased participation in programs, which in turn further decreases recidivism rates and increases safety at correctional facilities. It is difficult to remain infraction-free inside of these prisons and they have done that. This is earned good time. Earned good time credit can increase accountability and rehabilitation. In my over 10 years of experience working with incarcerated individuals, I have learned that people are capable of great change. The men and women who will be affected by this bill, have shown that they have changed. They have worked hard to rehabilitate themselves and to come back into society. I have seen men and women who served their time come home and make a deep impact in their communities, working to prevent the next generation from following the same path. These are the types of men and women we are keeping inside of prisons by passing this bill. This bill is purely punitive. Again I’m asking this committee to vote no to this bill. Thank you, Jennifer Dalton Founder/ Executive Director jdalton@ignite-justice.org 804-485-3314

My husband is incarcerated for a robbery charge in which nobody was hurt and no weapon was involved but because it is a robbery charge he is excluded and considered a violent criminal. Our 16 year old son and only child was murdered over the summer and this is some thing neither my husband or I should be dealing with alone and away from each other. I need my husband home with me. He has remained out of trouble and done what he is supposed to be doing. And I can speak from both sides and I can tell you right now the person who killed our son if he does his time changes his life for the better and feels remorse then I am absolutely okay with him being let out earlier if he has done everything he is supposed to do and earned that chance. People change just like people make mistakes and learn from them.

My name is Alison Chaffin, I am a special education teacher and higher education professor. I have a passion for prison reform due to the school to prison pipeline. Also, I have a loved one who has served 6 years in his incarceration. But this is not who he is. He is a father, a son, a brother and a member of his community. I'm asking today to please not support HB 1603. The state of the carceral system in Virginia makes it extremely difficult to remain infraction free, these men and women have worked hard to prepare themselves to come, and by that very fact shown that they have changed and earned the right to a second chance. Virginia is one of the highest states to incarcerate our black men and women. This is racist bill that will continue to disproportionately affect our black men and women and our children. Like Reverend Jerome Barber said in the opening, “let’s be a voice for the voiceless” and vote no for HB 1603. Let Virginia lead the way in closing the school to prison pipeline and encourage our men and women behind bars to reform. Thank you.

Please vote NO FOR HB1603 we should be including more people to have the chance to earn yes I WROTE EARN a chance to come home a little sooner!

My name is Emily Shelton. I am the founder of Ignite Justice, a non profit organization that focuses on the incarcerated population and their families. I also am a mother and a wife of someone incarcerated. Supporting earned sentence credits as an incentive provides active accountability, recognizes rehabilitative progress, and contributes to both a constructive correctional culture and gives an offender a positive goal. Research shows that offering these incentives has increased the successful completion of community supervision, participation in programming, decreases our prisons population, improves prison conduct, and contributes to system-wide fiscal savings. Studies also show that earned sentence credit benefits the community by reducing recidivism rates and improving post-release employment opportunities. At this time i am requesting you do not pass hb 1603 and give all violent offenders the opportunity to earn time off their sentencing to help them be productive in society. Thank You, Emily Shelton Ignite Justice-Founder eshelton@ignite-justice.org 804-326-4414

I support HB1615

I lost my 23yo daughter Kaitlyn to Fentanyl poisoning 1-15-21. There needs to be changes in order to hold those responsible for these deaths. Detectives did very little in investigating into who gave her / sold her the Fentanyl. They had her cellphone and simply asked us if we knew the password. Case closed a few days after her death. Why? She left behind 2 very precious and confused little girls that miss their mother terribly and are now at ages 5 & 6 in therapy.

Comments Document

An average of 300 people die a day due to illicit fentanyl. Illicit fentanyl is being laced in all drugs, and the users of these drugs are unaware that they are ingesting something other than what they purchased. It takes as little as 2ng’s of illicit fentanyl to kill a person. The number of deaths due to illicit fentanyl is astronomically increasing each year. Those who are supplying, giving, distributing these drugs that have been poisoned must be held accountable for the deaths they are causing. If someone ingesting any other illicit drug that did not contain illicit fentanyl, they would have the chance to obtain help and hopefully recover. Bower, with illicit fentanyl there is no chance for this, as many are dying, teens who are experiments, first time users, etc. before they even have the chance to get help! My daughter, Makayla Cox, died from a pill she thought was Percocet, and was pure fentanyl, just 2 shorts weeks after turning 16, on Jan 22, 2022.

Comments Document

The Commonwealth through its unmanaged Supplemental Registry continues to publicly malign citizens for a crime committed in the distant past. Expanding the unmanaged registry in no way enhances public safety. The issue is the publication of the § 9.1-923. Supplement to the Sex Offender and Crimes Against Minors Registry required by the 2015 memorial "Robby's Rule" law. Virginia State Police makes no attempt to manage the list. Even from its initial publication, the supplement has included deceased citizens. It still lists numerous decedents. Expanding the Supplement serves no public safety purpose. The original Supplement never did. It was another wasteful attempt at government to pacify one victim. The attached recommendation would better serve the Commonwealth.

The registry is morally and ethically WRONG. This is punishment until someone is dead and then it still never ends. The registry destroys families and communities and has never shown to keep anyone "safe'. With the "no victim" sting cases, put on by ICAC, we have incentivized policing. Collars for dollars. This needs to be stopped. Disband the registry.

There is ZERO evidence that the sex offender registry protects anyone, especially children. There is more evidence that it does more harm than good creating vigilante acts and harming children who may be stigmatized if they live in a home with a parent or grandparent who is forced to register their address. It also wastes valuable resources which could be used to prevent and provide help to victims/survivors. Expanding it would only further harm children and families and create a false sense of security considering that 95% of these crimes involving children are NOT committed by anyone previously convicted of this type of crime. Not to mention the fact that we are robbing men and women who have served their time of due process considering the registry was not created when they took pleas or were convicted. And regardless of what fear-mongering politicians and judges claim, the registry is PUNISHMENT and no less than DOUBLE JEOPARDY. I am a retired elementary public school teacher and dedicated my life to educating and protecting children and I can attest to the fact that the registry has never protected any child! Even Patti Wetterling, who pushed for a registry after a horrific crime to her precious son, Jacob, has publicly stated that the registry does more harm than good. Please reject this bill and focus on real protection and prevention strategies.

Hi

I oppose this bill for many reasons, the registry . 1. It provides no true safety for our community 2. The Virginia State Police is understaffed and can barley keep up with newly convicted individuals with a sexual offense. 3. The individuals who have a sexual offense fron29 years ago with no prior reoffending with an actual victim is x- post facto 4. The Registry cost tax payers millions of dollars and the facts are that anyone on a registry more than ten years is highly unlikely to re-offend less than 1% percent 5. We the tax payers should be spending money on education of our children reguarding what an actual sex offense is and how easy it is to get placed on a registry. I oppose this bill because it’s a waste of money and will provide no safety within our community if these men and women have never been on a registry why place them there now?? Do you think it makes the world safer?? Most of these people have lived decades without being on a registry and there involvement in the community has been good they wasn’t a public safety hazard then and they are not one now.

The current situation with the sex offender registry is horrendous. Those on it forfeit a normal life ad infinitum. What is the point of bestowing this great lifestyle upon older people who have not reoffended? I am interested as to why this bill has been brought up. What is the purpose of such a bill? Thank you.

This is unconstitutional. You can't retroactively add punishment to a crime decades after it has been tried and the sentence imposed by the judge. Putting someone on the sex offender registry IS PUNISHMENT. Therefore, you can't add people to the registry after their sentencing.

We write in opposition to any enhancement to the dubious, unnecessary, and dysfunctional Sex Offender Registry. 1). No study supports efficacy of the Registry. None. The American Legal institute has posited that no one should be on the registry for term greater than 10 years. The lowest bar in VA right now is 15 years. 2). Registry does not reduce recividism. AT BEST it is a feel good system, expensive, and uwieldy. 3). When one finishes one's time, that should be the effective end of punishment, but it is not. 4). The registry creates stigma and discrimination, effectively making those so placed as wards of the state. 5). There is no benefit for going farther in to the past to punish someone. 6). The registry makes no distinction between those who committed acts, and those, like me and others, who did not. If a police officer or prosecutor makes the case that you did it, that is often good enough for a court. There is no redress all ready in VA Law. The Sex Offender Registry is an additional burden top of all the rights, monies, retirement, damage to family and reputation, and worse. Where is there EVIDENCE that making matters worse yields better results? When has punishing even more resulted in good outcomes? This bill msut be defeated, as it does nothing more than lead by ignorance, fear, loathing, and assumptions which are often misguided or entirely unwarranted, if not utter falsehoods. Where is the Justice? Norman M. Achin

Vote NO on HB1380, 1445, and 1703.

HB1365: I strongly oppose this bill. Virginia made a huge step forward in protecting the rights of all Virginia residents by restoring the presumption of innocence for people accused of crimes by eliminating presumptions against bail. This bill is a step backwards and erodes personal liberty. HB1380, 1445 & 1703: I oppose all these bills on the same grounds. Unnecessary traffic stops needlessly endanger Virginians and are a waste public of resources.

Good afternoon, I strongly oppose all 3 of these similar bills increasing the number of small infractions that a driver/pedestrian can be detained and cited for. I believe this change will result in less safety and respect for officers as community members may feel harassed or targeted with minor infractions. This change will open the door to greater discrimination against people of color who are already targeted at higher numbers for traffic stops. As a conservative with family members who were in law enforcement I strongly believe we need to support laws that increase transparency, equal policing and community policing which will result in a safer environment for our officers and more community respect for the police force. These bills do not meet that standard and I ask you to vote NO. These bills set up the opportunity for increased discrimination through profiling of drivers for traffic stops on minute infractions. The opportunity for negative community interactions will increase greatly if any of these bills are passed. Please vote no on HB1380, HB1445 and HB1703

Virginia has a well documented history of how traffic citations, etc. are used disproportionately to target Black and Brown populations. The rationale and data were presented in a prior General Assembly session; legislation was passed to prohibit this. Allowing "pretextual policing" didn't keep Virginia safer. It just perpetuates the injustice that is created due to implicit bias. Virginia must continue to make our criminal justice system more just. We must not reverse the gains that have been made in the past several years. See https://youtu.be/pLC_iWeA3zE for details about the negative impact of pretextual policing.

HB1830, HB1703 These items have proven to be a danger to the public. Thank you to Del Campbell and Del Durant for bringing this before the committee. Please protect the public and pass it. HB1365 Some heinous crimes should be kept locked up for the protection of the public. Please protect the public and pass it.

I oppose HB1380, HB1445, and HB1703 as they would move the Commonwealth backward on the great gains we have made this decade in criminal justice reform.

Efforts to curb the creation and dissemination of child pornography should be strongly supported. Numerous law enforcement agencies routinely employ tactics that lie to the public, e.g., pretending to be a minor in order to entrap an adult. Including the hash values of images may enable all parties to have a clearer understanding of who is producing and distributing new images. The primary objective should be to eliminate as much child pornography as possible, not to maintain a robust directory of these images to be routinely viewed by law enforcement.

Hi

Hi

HB1916 - this fixes problems when boards don't act HB2272 - this will help African Americans (and possibly other minorities too) that should they need to go on to other educational institutions to finish training/education, they don't have a huge debt already from undergrad and therefore be less financially burdened when they become employed in their field. HB2425 - Good idea.

I am a victim of violent sexual crimes that occured in 3 Virginia jurisdictions. The defendant (my ex-husband) received 17 felony charges and we had a jury trial in each jurisdiction. The court proceedings started in 2017 and are ongoing. His current sentence is 23 years and when he gets released I will relocate from the Charlottesville area, and change my name. This is because the last thing he did before being arrested was threaten to come to my workplace and shoot me. Over the last six years I've worked with 14 different Assistant Commonwealth's Attorneys and one Senior Assistant Attorney General. I've been asked to sign the request to be notified only a couple times. It seemed like keeping victims in the loop was standard practice with or without that form via Victim/Witness Advocate programs or by prosecutors themselves. Opponents of this bill argue that it will be a strain on the court system if witnesses can't be located or don't show up to court. Both of these concerns are specifically addressed in the statute. It should be noted that the statute only applies to notifying the victim of the disposition of the case (IE a proposed plea, dismissal, or sentencing hearing) - meaning it won't hold up proceedings prior that. Further, it says that the court may exercise discretion when good cause is shown for not being able to get in contact with the victim. Criminal justice reform advocates have opposed this bill, saying it will cause defendants to be held longer (although currently they have no presumption) or will clog up the system. My estimiation is that this change wouldn't weigh the docket down nearly as much as a change such as the proposed Second Look bill. Opponents also argue that some victims may not want to be contacted. I'd argue that this is likely a moot point as frequently the victim IS the evidence and the Commonwealth wouldn't bring a case to court if they haven't been able to make contact (or a victim has expressed they don't wish to be contacted/move forward). Bottom line is that our Commonwealth's Attorneys are already notifying victims and this change only ensures the integrity of this gesture. It shows we stand behind our values and acknoledge victims, at least to ask for their input at the end. Our court process was rightfully designed to give the accused a fair trial. There's one statute (this one) that gives a framework for victims' rights. I'm 100% for reforming courts and corrections - but we must balance it with reform for the victim experience.

This bill will help in stopping of bullying, intimidation, and mob rule of a judge when they need to be impartial and not influenced by anything other than the law.

I oppose HB2015 as it is clearly unconstitutional.

This bill would only further the patchwork of federal, state, and local laws addressing unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). The FAA has stated twice that "State and local governments are not permitted to regulate any type of aircraft operations, such as flight paths or altitudes, or the navigable airspace." The restrictions proposed in this bill would also not be shown on the UAS Data Display System, nor many other maps drone flyers may reference. Additionally Code of Virginia Titles 18.2-473 through 18.2-474.1 already address delivery of contraband to prisoners if that is patron's concern. Instead of implementing lateral flight restrictions, the state is empowered to limit the takeoff or landing of an UAS on the specific state or local property in question, however signage should be posted as due notice to the public.

Hi

I am writing in favor of the up to $500 deduction for VA teachers who purchase teaching materials, in HB 2065. My colleagues and I at CNU spend hundreds of dollars for books necessary to teach our courses. Some of my colleagues and I even buy books to give to students for their coursework, when students cannot afford them. These costs are not reimbursed by our university and a bit of relief on State tax returns would be highly beneficial.

Paul Ferguson, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Arlington VA & City of Falls Church VA HB 2071 would allow residents to avoid paying a $500 bond for one time ceremonies. $500 is a lot of money for residents to pay. We have found that some checks are returned for insufficient funds. Personal responsibility would rest with the one time marriage officiant to return the marriage license to the clerk's office after the ceremony. The newly married couple could also turn in the marriage license for the officiant. In addition to eliminating the $500 bond burden currently imposed upon one time officiants, it eliminates the inefficient process of Clerk's depositing a $500 check then returning $500 at a later time. There is no bond imposed upon certified ministers or civil celebrants when performing marriages. The court relies on the personal responsibility of the celebrant or newly married couple to return the marriage license within 30 days. Eliminating the $500 bond for one time celebrants would make the rules consistent for all who perform marriages. This bill would also allow the Circuit Court Clerk the authority to certify the one time officiant rather than have the resident have to wait for a Judge to sign an order. This is an administrative matter that is more practically handled by a Clerk's Office then a Judge. The applicant would obtain certification quicker by allowing the Clerk to authorize directly. Although I am a former President of the Virginia Circuit Court Clerk's Association, I am speaking for myself rather than the association. Not all Clerks agree with this legislation. A compromise would be to provide a local option where the Clerk makes a decision to proceed with the new authority granted by the legislation or to keep the option of keeping the $500 bond requirement in place. Convenience for your constituents, eliminating a burdensome, expensive bond, relying on the personal responsibility of the officiant and newly married couple, and creating efficiencies in government are all reasons to pass this legislation.

Hi