JIS Data Dissemination Committee
April 27, 2007
Judge Ken Grosse, Chair,
Judge Glenna Hall, King County Superior Court
Judge James Heller, Pierce County District Court
Don Horowitz, Attorney, ATJ
Molly Lawrence, Attorney, Northwest Women’s
Barb Miner, Clerk, King County Superior Court
Rowland Thompson, Allied Daily Newspapers
Judge Stilz opened the meeting and introductions were made.
The minutes from the
ACTION ITEM: John Bell will work with Mr. Bates and Mr. Menaul. If an agreeable form can be produced, Mr. Bell will circulate to the DD Committee via email for their approval.
Barb Miner, King County Superior Court Clerk, stated she had received recent sealing orders that also requested that she seal the execution docket. The AOC prompts will not allow sealing and there is a statute that states that the execution docket should remain public. It was agreed that the bench has the authority to seal the execution docket. It was acknowledged that the AOC systems do not currently allow for the ability to seal the execution docket. Converting the name of the defendant to initials on the index is one work-around, however it was noted that this workaround effectively seals the index. AOC staff had estimated 500 hours of work to do this.
ACTION ITEMS: AOC will look into the 500 hour estimate and the feasibility of implementing a solution now vs. waiting for the new core case management system. In the mean time, Ms. Miner and Ms. Woods are to work with the Clerk Association on a work-around to the problem.
Jennifer Creighton, AOC Information Access manager, was present to answer and ask questions regarding the implementation of a possible policy regarding Domestic Violence petitions. The question is whether is needed to comply with VAWA law. The Committee agreed that the Supreme Court wants all court records to be available on a one-tiered basis. In order to comply with the most liberal reading of the VAWA law (that it applies to all domestic violence protection orders) and the Supreme Court’s mandate that accessed be one-tiered, would required that all DV protection orders be confidential. The question is whether this would promote effective law enforcement. If not, then we would continue to have the law apply only to foreign protection orders.
The remaining items were tabled due to time restraints.
|Courts | Organizations | News | Opinions | Rules | Forms | Directory | Library|
|Back to Top | Privacy and Disclaimer Notices|