Sen. Raskin Responds! Blames New Loophole on Mysterious Colleagues!

This evening Senator Jamie Raskin posted a statement on his campaign website in response to the discussions that have occurred over the last 24 hours concerning SB460.  

The statement is dated February 16, 2014.  That is 21 days after SB460 was introduced in the Maryland legislature, and 4 days after the public hearing on this Bill was held! Considering that this Bill is sponsored by 3 Montgomery County Senators and that this is the first Montgomery County citizens are hearing about the new loophole proposed by our Senators, the "statement" comes rather late. (Did you want to give public comment? Too late.)

In his "statement", Senator Raskin blames unnamed "colleagues" for the new loophole that he proposes adding to Maryland law.  

Statement on SB460 by Senator Jamie Raskin
February 16, 2014 

...Several colleagues on the Senate Judicial Proceedings and House Judiciary Committee are concerned about criminalizing cases involving persons in authority who are close in age to the student... 

One more time, here is what Senator Raskin wants added to Maryland law: Under the NEW loophole that is included in Senator Raskin's Bill it will NO LONGER be a crime for a 21, 22, or 23 year old teacher to have sex with a 16 year old student, nor will it be a crime for a 21-24 year old teacher to have sex with a 17 year old student.

So who are the "several colleagues" that demand this change to Maryland law?

Feb 16, 2014


February 16, 2014

This session, along with my colleagues Senator Jenny Forehand and Senator Nancy King, I introduced SB460, a bill that will help protect teens from sexual exploitation by persons in positions of authority over them. Our Swiss-cheese laws in addressing this serious issue are filled with loopholes and fail to adequately protect our young people. As a father of two daughters and one son and as a strong champion of the rights and welfare of young people, I am committed to making substantial positive progress on the issue this Session after many years of legislative dawdling and obstruction.

The law today is complicated. One part of the law is strong and my bill will not change this in any way: a person who has care and custody of a child under 18 or who has supervision of a child faces a 25 year felony if they sexually exploit the child while the child is under his or her care.

The problem is this: the felony law applies only while the child is under the care of the adult. So, for instance, if you send your 16- or 17-year old to train for the Olympic ice skating team, the coach cannot have sex with her or him during the time they are coaching your teenager, but the felony law does not apply at all during off hours.

Advocates have been trying for many years to close this giant loophole. In 2006, Maryland made a little progress. The General Assembly passed a law prohibiting full-time, permanent employees who are at least 21 from having sex with the minors they exercise supervision over at a public or private preschool, elementary school, or secondary school. The law says this includes principals, vice-principals, teachers, and counselors. The punishment for a violation is one year in prison for a first time offense and three years for subsequent offenses.

Read that carefully: the person in authority must be full time. They must be permanent. They must be an employee. And they must be at a pre-school, elementary school, or secondary school .

These narrowing criteria leave massive and dangerous loopholes. In 2012, a shocking case came to light in the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/sex-offense-law-in-maryland-has-loophole/2012/06/16/gJQAWdoohV_story.html

The story shows how gaps in the law left Montgomery County teens without protection and the 47 year-old coach who sexually exploited them received no punishment at all. This is because he waited until “off-hours” and was a part-time school coach to conduct his predatory activities.

For many of us, this is a terrible and untenable outrage: a 47-year old man escaping criminal prosecution for sex with teens he was coaching because he was "only" a part-time employee. We do not send our teens to learn gymnastics or lacrosse expecting the coaches to try to have sex with them nor do we believe that teens are not subject to a teacher’s authority during off-hours simply because the teacher is part-time or a substitute. Clearly, the law needs to be fixed. Two bills have been introduced this session to address this. My bill is SB460, and is also filed in the House asHB781. The other bill is HB362. I believe mine is the stronger bill although I am always open to taking the best proposals in the legislative process.

When my colleague Delegate Luke Clippinger (who is a prosecutor in Baltimore) and I drafted our bill, we worked hand-in-hand with anti-sexual violence advocates. Of particular importance, we wanted to be sure that the law covers volunteers. The vast majority of volunteers obviously have integrity and strengthen our community. Unfortunately, volunteering is also a way for sexual predators to gain access to teens. The other bill, HB362, does not cover volunteers at all, which is a perilous omission. My bill also criminalizes sex with teens for all persons in authority at all sports and recreational facilities and programs. This is important. It would mean that persons in authority at private programs teaching swimming, lacrosse, soccer, and the like would be prohibited from sexually exploiting teens. However, the other bill expands coverage only to employees or contractors at “a county department of recreation.” I believe all sports and recreational facilities and programs must be included, whether public or private. Finally, my bill would impose a penalty of up to 5 years for criminal conduct while the other bill leaves the penalty at one year.

My bill also addresses concerns that have been raised in past sessions and that have made it impossible to pass these necessary expansions of the law. Recall that this is an issue that has prompted legislation since at least 2003, for more than a decade. Delegate Pauline Menes championed it. Delegate Carol Petzold took up the cause next. And last year there were multiple bills attempting in vain to close the loopholes. Several colleagues on the Senate Judicial Proceedings and House Judiciary Committee are concerned about criminalizing cases involving persons in authority who are close in age to the student. So they have not passed a bill and -- because no bill passed -- teens like the young woman exploited by her 47 year old coach are left without protection or justice. This year, working hand-in-hand with the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault, we crafted a bill that includes a 7 year age gap between the minor and the person in authority. Am I open to eliminating or reducing this age gap? Absolutely-I hope we can. That is an approach I have advocated before. Do I believe that SB460 as written is a huge improvement in the law even with the age gap? Absolutely. We cannot allow the perfect to become an obstacle to the very good changes we can get done.

During the hearings before both the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, we heard testimony that efforts to close the loopholes in the law have been presented and failed year after year. We learned that if the General Assembly had passed a compromise bill a decade ago, we could have provided justice to teens who had been sexually exploited during the intervening years. And we heard passionate pleas to craft a strong compromise to pass a bill that prohibits sexual exploitation of teens by older persons in authority even if we cannot reach an agreement about how to address cases where the adult and teen are closer in age.

I have always been a strong advocate for victims/survivors of sexual violence. My bill on ending paternity rights of rapists has passed the Senate unanimously three times only to die in the House, but it is one of the top priorities of the anti-sexual violence community in this Session and we are determined to pass this too. I am also proud to have co-sponsored the bill to change the standard of proof in protective orders to help support victims of domestic violence. SB460 is part of my ongoing efforts to improve the laws to end violence against women and children. It is a major and strong step forward and I urge you to join me in supporting its passage.

Finally, some people have willfully distorted the facts of this matter on the Internet and attacked the "cognitive" skills of my colleagues Senator Jenny Forehand and Nancy King, two very fine and distinguished public servants. This is outrageous and these ad hominem attacks debase public policy discourse. I will work with anyone who wants to improve the law and is acting with good will, but my colleagues are owed an apology.