{"id":20977,"date":"2017-03-03T11:26:27","date_gmt":"2017-03-03T17:26:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/?p=20977"},"modified":"2017-03-03T11:26:27","modified_gmt":"2017-03-03T17:26:27","slug":"stronger-protections-proposed-for-child-depositions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/?p=20977","title":{"rendered":"Stronger protections proposed for child depositions"},"content":{"rendered":"

Additional considerations would be made for children involved in criminal court cases under a bill heard by the Judiciary Committee March 2.<\/p>\n

\"Sen.
Sen. Sue Crawford<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Under LB589, introduced by Bellevue Sen. Sue Crawford, no deposition of a child would be granted if a video-recorded forensic interview has been conducted by an accredited child advocacy center, unless the deposition would aid in the disclosure of evidence vital to a defendant\u2019s case.<\/p>\n

Crawford said the bill shifts the burden of proof to the defense attorney requesting a deposition of a child. LB589 does not prohibit depositions from taking place, but it does allow for greater protection of the child\u2019s physical and mental health, she said.<\/p>\n

The judge granting the deposition would be required to implement any protective measures to shield the child from harm or distress, harassment or intimidation. Such measures could include designating a specific time and location for the deposition to take place, limiting the scope of the deposition, providing a victim advocate or guardian ad litem, physically excluding the defendant from the deposition or any other reasonable protection for the child.<\/p>\n

Dan Salvo-McGinn, an assistant county attorney for Pottawattamie County, supported the bill, saying a forensic interview is far less detrimental to a child and could yield better results than a deposition.<\/p>\n

\u201cWith depositions, the key in interviewing a child is to establish a rapport with the child and that rarely happens in a deposition,\u201d he said. \u201cThe rapport is always there in a forensic interview because the child is in a comfortable room and [the interviewer] can freely get the information.\u201d<\/p>\n

Nebraska CASA Executive Director Corrie Kielty also testified in support of the bill. She said the well-being of children must take precedence when preparing someone for trial. Depositions can be stressful for any person, she said, let alone a young child who may have experienced physical and emotional trauma.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is essential that the courts work to provide a safe environment and do everything possible to not re-victimize children,\u201d Kielty said. \u201cThere is no reason to risk re-traumatization of child victims for a deposition.\u201d<\/p>\n

Christopher Lathrop, representing the Nebraska Criminal Defense Attorneys Association, opposed the bill. He said it would figuratively handcuff attorneys and make it difficult to adequately represent their clients.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis bill is a direct assault on the integrity of the system,\u201d he said, adding that it is unfair to give the prosecution unlimited access to a child to prepare for trial while limiting access to the defense.<\/p>\n

The committee took no immediate action on the bill.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Additional considerations would be made for children involved in criminal court cases under a bill heard by the Judiciary Committee March 2.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[13],"tags":[106],"class_list":["post-20977","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judiciary","tag-sen-sue-crawford"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20977","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=20977"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20977\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20979,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20977\/revisions\/20979"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=20977"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=20977"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=20977"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}