Gender and Justice Commission

July 11, 2008

Gender and Justice Commission

Friday, July 11, 2008, 9:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

Meeting Minutes

Members in Attendance:  Justice Barbara Madsen, Ms. Jeri Costa, Judge Sara Derr, Judge Joan DuBuque, Ms. Grace Huang, Judge Cynthia Jordan, Professor Natasha Martin, Judge Craig Matheson, Ms. Leslie Owen, Ms. Yvonne Pettus, Judge James Riehl, Mr. Bernie Ryan, Justice Jane Smith, Judge Chris Wickham, and Ms. Myra Downing, Commission Coordinator.

Guests:  Ms. Jennifer Creighton, Ms. Sharon Eckholm, Mr. Ross Farr, Judge Judy Jasprica, and Mr. Chris Ruhl. 

Members Absent:  Ms. Barbara Carr, Mr. Michael Killian, and Judge John Schultheis. 

COMMISSION BUSINESS

May 9, 2008 meeting minutes were read and approved.

Gender and Justice Commission Budget Report 

The Commission was within budget for the 2007-2008 year. 

STOP Grants

v  2005 STOP grant contract is completed.

v  2006 STOP grants have been extended for one year to allow those receiving funds to complete their projects.

v  2007 STOP grants have been selected and contracts have been written.  A portion of the grant was set aside to fund judicial training.

Commission Scholarships

Commission members discussed possible approaches to granting educational scholarships.  The importance of “getting the word out” was emphasized by maximizing use of the Administrative Office of the Courts listserv.  Geographical representation, gender, prior recipient of funding, and current or upcoming work assignments were mentioned as possible selection criteria. 

Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence Fund Request

It was decided that more information would be needed before this request could be funded.

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM STATUS REPORTS

Color of Justice Program

Professor Martin reported on the Color of Justice Program held on Wednesday, May 21, 2008.  Youth from St. Therese School and the Urban League Scholars students attended.  Chief Leschi School was unable to participate this year.  The program included two panels.  One panel consisted of professionals who “told their story.”  The other panel consisted of professionals who talked more generally about the steps involved in becoming lawyers.  There were two activity sessions:  one was a mock trial with students taking roles and the other was called “Hats in the Classroom” and explored the challenge of applying the law in different situations.  The participants particularly enjoyed the interactive sessions.  The program closed with a motivational speaker.  Seattle University provided the site, the materials and the refreshments.

There were several suggestions for enhancing future programs. 

• Start earlier so there is more time for activities and sessions.
• Partner with other groups offering similar programs, i.e. the Washington State Bar Association
• Have follow-up resources and/or activities.
• Propose additions to the school curriculum that would allow for a longer study cycle.

DMCJA War and the Courts Session

Judge Riehl provided an overview of the Effects of the War on Returning Men and Women Soldiers session offered at the District and Municipal Court Judges Conference on June 4, 2008.  The session had three major components:   how the current war is different from previous wars focusing on multiple deployments, the increase in traumatic brain injuries and post traumatic stress disorder, and identifying behaviors and possible treatment approaches available to judicial officers.  The session received very high evaluations.  There were two unanticipated outcomes.  One, the military presenters seemed a bit reluctant to acknowledge the problems.  Two, we did not take into account the impact on the audience because of their own personal or family experiences. 

Commissioners discussed the relevance of the session for all judicial officers and recommended it be submitted for consideration at a future Annual Judicial Conference and Spring Superior Court conference and the session should be three hours instead of two. It was also suggested that a day-long session might be appropriate.  Pam Loginsky, Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorney’s and Dr. Ann Ganley were mentioned as possible contacts and faculty.

Sexual Orientation Session

Ross Farr was present to review the session he is leading for the 2008 Annual Conference.  The program will be very similar to the one given at the 2007 Presiding Judges Conference.  A discussion about the domestic partner legislation will be added.  The plan is to use the additional time allocated for the session to work through scenarios with participants using small groups.  Commission members had the following suggestions:

• Bring in someone who could focus on dissolution issues
• Ensure the scenarios address issues for all court levels.  Some examples - name changes, when a person appears in court presenting as the opposite sex, gay couple separating (dividing resources, etc.), domestic violence issues
• Discuss using small claims to resolve issues
• Create a scenario dealing with bringing people into chambers to address some issues

PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS STATUS REPORTS

DV Summit

Judge Derr reviewed the Spokane Summit that occurred on June 6, 2008.  The summit was a day long and sponsored by the YMCA, Gonzaga University, and the Gender and Justice Commission. Feedback indicated that the event was very successful.  Students at Gonzaga University developed a video that illustrated the path of a person who is a victim or perpetrator of domestic violence.  The video was followed by discussion among groups regarding a coordinated community response to domestic violence in Spokane and how it could be improved or enhanced.  Questions solicited prior to the event and opportunities for answers were built into the program. The mayor was the opening speaker.  There were representatives from the medical, education, law enforcement, business, community services and criminal justice fields. 

Follow-up activities include monthly meetings, a six month review and the hiring of a facilitator. 

Success Inside and Out

Yvonne Pettus provided an update on the Success Inside and Out project.  There have been two meetings with the Department of Corrections (DOC) and two focus groups to gather information on potential topics.  One focus group was with women released from prison and the other was with DOC employees and those providing services for the women. 

Commission members suggested the following:

• Follow up with Pierce County and Kitsap County Women Lawyers Associations to see if they would like to be involved with the project or assist in a clothing drive.
• Coordinate with the Pierce County YWCA.
• Contact the Goodwill and Value Village to see if they would be willing to donate clothes.
• Justice Smith may know a hair stylist that could volunteer her/his services.

GR 31/Internet Access

Ms. Jennifer Creighton reviewed GR 31 that was passed a few years ago and addresses access to information on the internet.  While the impact of GR 31 is broad, Ms. Creighton focused her remarks to this topic.

A recap of her presentation on Domestic Violence Order Filings:

There are three ways to file an order:

1. Criminal Action – order filed subsequent to criminal charges.
2. Family Law Action – order filed as part of a dissolution or meretricious relationship case.
3. Civil Action – domestic violence petition (DVP), foreign protection order (FPO), and sexual assault protection (SXP).

Parties to the Case:

• Criminal – only defendants are listed, so victim names are already protected.
• Family Law – All participants in a family law case are public record.  Petitioners, respondents, minors and parents are all listed.  No assumptions can be made as to who is the victim and who is the perpetrator.
• Civil – Foreign protection orders are not public record and no information appears in the search results.  Domestic violence petitions and sexual assault protection cases are public.  Petitioners, respondents, defendants, minors, and parents are listed.

Civil Case Parties

• Problem – petitioner, plaintiff and minor can be assumed to be the victim(s); those names are displayed
• Solution – filter out plaintiff, minor, and petitioner for the DVP and SXP cases.
• Impact – no change to court business

Docketing Information – order and proceeding information is available by clicking on a party’s name

• Problem – petitions for and issuance of protection order available
• Solution – do not display docket codes indicating issuance of protection orders
• Impact – education may be needed to ensure all courts are using the correct docket codes
• Question – in criminal cases where the victim cannot be identified, should the information be repressed?

Ms. Creighton pointed out that policy decisions are made by the Judicial Information System Committee (JISC) or the Data Dissemination Committee.  She informed commission members that requests for change are to be sent to these committees.

Several other questions emerged during the discussion. 

• Should GR 31 be modified? 
• Should we recommend a technical adjustment that can limit victim information?  Should we recommend a technical change that would exclude the petitioner automatically? 
• Should we withhold docket information until the case is resolved (this addresses the issue of identification of the person being a victim before some is found guilty). 

There were also some suggestions: 

• Start collecting data that demonstrate collateral consequences for victims and if they are placed at additional risk because of the documentation on line. 
• Develop allies with other groups who might support the Commission’s desire to limit some information on the internet.
• Find out total funding for domestic violence services that Washington State receives from the Federal Government.
• Review the retention schedule to determine how long the information is kept on the website.
• Have a presentation that shows what is available on the internet, such as medical treatment, ability to track partners, etc.

CPL Update

Bernie Ryan and Judge Jasprica provided an update on the CPL work.  Bernie and Myra have met with representatives from Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC), Department of Licensing (DOL), and Washington State Patrol.  The question asked of WASPC was “Can we get real time notification?”  The answer is no.  During those meetings it was confirmed that the average length of time from the point the judicial officer suspends the license to the law enforcement agency entering the rescission is about three weeks.  Most courts, even the larger ones, gather the suspensions in batches and then send them out about once a week.  It takes an additional two weeks to rescind the license and enter the information into the DOL system and then finally have the information entered into the local law enforcement agency system.  Another challenge to getting real time information is that the information is not easily available to the judicial officers.   While there are terminals available within the courthouse, there is limited access.  There is no access in the courtroom because it is not a secure site.   Suggestions:  Look for agencies that might be interested in supporting legislation that would ensure real time information for judicial officers.

NEW BUSINESS

SB 6357 – Service of Process for Domestic Violence Cases

Legislation was passed that was intended to make it easier for a petitioner to get a protection order.  SB 6357 states that “the court shall not require more than two attempts at obtaining personal service and shall permit service by publication or by mail unless the petitioner requests additional time to attempt personal service.”  While everyone agrees that the legislation is very helpful, representatives from the District and Municipal Court Judges Association surfaced a potential problem - the petitioner may not have the funds to publish the notice in the paper.  Possible solutions were discussed.  One proposed solution was contacting newspapers to see if they would be willing to publish for free or a reduced rate.  Commissioners thought this might be possible if the number of people needing this assistance is small.  Some effort would need to be given to determining an estimate of the number of people who would utilize this approach. 

Commission Retreat

Justice Madsen and Myra talked with Commissioners about having a planning retreat.  Commissioners agreed that a retreat would be very helpful to them in creating a work plan. 

Adjournment