Judiciary Committee- House
Video
Transcript
3 documents
Bills discussed (1)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1829
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…for your attention uh to this today and referencing back to house bill 1829 uh that this committee took up during the session as miss d…”
|
TO AMEND THE DOMESTIC ABUSE ACT OF 1991; TO PROVIDE FOR REMOTE TESTIMONY IN CERTAIN … | Dalby | Recommended for study in the Interim by the … |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 6, 2026
First of all, before we get started, I would like for us to take just a moment of silence to remember the flooding in central Texas and the loss of life there as well as in New Mexico. For those of us who are in the southern part of the state and particularly in the southwest part of the state,
it really does impact us. We know people from the Hill Country. We know
folks that are impacted by this, and certainly if we'll just take just a moment of prayerful silence, if you'll stand.
Thank you. You may be seated. the first order of business we have on our agenda is a consideration to approve the september 23rd 2024 meeting minutes you can see that we don't meet very often in the interim i see a motion from representing baity is there a second of a second from speaker evans any discussion all in favor please say aye the ayes have it the motion carries the next we need a motion to authorize
me to approve our special expenses incurred by the committee during the interim i have a motion from representative hudson do i have a second i have a second from speaker evans any discussion on the motion seeing no discussion all in favor please say aye any opposed say no the ayes have it thank you the motion carries members we're here today to discuss the isp that i have put into an isp this came from uh an act that came i mean a bill that came through it was a house bill
1829 back uh this spring in that bill it did come through our committee without any objection it came through the house with 94 votes in favor no one voting against it but it ran into a snag or two down on the senate end and so we felt like it was important enough that we have this interim study because this bill will come back in the next session and we want to make sure that if there are any questions on the house side that we get this bill in the the best uh shape so that we
head off any concerns that there may be in the senate on this bill and so it's as you will recall this was amending the Domestic Violence Abuse Act of 1991 so it was time for it to be amended from 1991 to 2025 so that's why this morning
we're going to have a study on this at the conclusion of
that study I will be making a motion to approve the ISP so that's where we're
always headed on isps i know this committee doesn't do isps very often in fact somebody asked me this morning said is it mistake i see that the house judiciary is meeting in the interim which we never do but it's important this is an important matter that i want us to thoroughly talk about if there's any any questions on it also just give you a little heads up i've had another member in the house who has an interim study that's been assigned to our committee and
she has asked for an interim study meeting time and we're looking toward the fall for that sometime September or October so we may have one other one with that so with that I'm going to ask Vice Chair Underwood if he'll take the chair's position and I'll go down to the table and you'll see that we have kind of an outline of how our discussion or how our meeting is going to go and so we're going to go by that
and I look forward to a very fruitful and interesting discussion
this morning so with that Vice Chair Underwood when you're ready you're
recognized to present thank you mr. chair at this time i would like to
ask ms duncan lindsey duncan if you'll come and have a seat next to me just as uh as ms duncan makes her way miss duncan is a constituent out of speaker evans district i think she has a very compelling story to tell us
why we need this bill and why we need the changes to the 1991 domestic abuse act and with that i ask you to carefully listen to miss duncan i think you'll
understand why this is a passion of mine a passion of the judicial council and a passion of Speaker Evans.
Lindsay Duncan
Unverified
5:21
Good morning. Thank you for having me. My name is Lindsay Duncan and I am perhaps very informal with Speaker Evans because I know him personally. I call him neighbor and I'm very, very grateful for him allowing me and my child to have a voice in this issue. I did bring a picture of
Speaker 19
5:41
my child because I think sometimes it helps to have a face
associated with a story. So this is who we're talking about today. Good morning. I'm humbled by the opportunity to speak with you all today. I'd always told my friends and family that once my oldest child turned 18, I was going to retire from teaching and become a lobbyist for the rights of children from situations of domestic violence. I was always afraid to broach the topic until then for fear of retaliation, which I'll explain over the next few minutes. However, there seems to be more awareness and receptiveness to the subject at this point in time than there has been in the past and I felt urged to reach out and at least try to give my own child a voice, a voice that he
hasn't had. I'm here today as a mother, a mother whose child has endured 12 years of fear, powerlessness, and trauma that our legal system has failed to prevent. I feel very blessed to be here today and I'm very thankful to my friend and neighbor Brian. Brian has always been someone that is ready to help in any way he can and I felt like he was the person I could reach out to and give my Sears and Roebuck Christmas list as he calls it. My wish list of wrongs we could write for these children to share how our current laws fail children exposed to domestic violence and to propose critical changes that could protect them. But before I present you all with the list
and the explanations and stories behind each item on it, I'd like to explain a little bit of how I found myself in a situation to make this list for my child. I'd like to also ask in advance for your forgiveness. My son is currently with the person I'll discuss today on a two-week visit, so this is particularly emotional to deliver at this point in time. I'd like to introduce you to that child. I have two children, but the oldest is who I'm here for today. This is Chael. He's 12 and a half. That half is important. He's going into seventh grade. He is a competitive soccer player, and if you ask him, he's going pro someday.
He's a regional chess champion. He's going into all honors classes, and he's the most intrinsically motivated person I've ever met. He's a person of faith and integrity, and he'll tell the truth even if he gets in trouble. He was the kid that I could raise an eyebrow at, and he'd go put himself in timeout. He's kind and has so many friends that adore him from many different circles at school. His teachers love his funny, quirky self. He's shy, but he also has strength and braveness to him that I don't see in a lot of other children. He's discerning well above his years, probably due to the path his life has taken.
And he looks at situations very differently from his peers. He has an air of adult seriousness that I wish I could take from him and give him the carefree spirit of his younger brother who hasn't lived the same life. He'd tell you that he has two loving parents, two sets of adoring grandparents, and doesn't acknowledge that one part of his life even exists 90% of the time. He has a remarkably normal, charmed life, all things considered, except for twice a year. Over the years, he's changed his names on his papers at school, expressed to his teachers that he doesn't want to go on visits with his biological father,
told his friends that his dad is mean to him, and expressed to anyone that really would listen to him that someday he plans to be adopted by my husband. He's extremely frustrated and has been for years that he doesn't have a say in his life. No child should have to beg not to be sent into the arms of their abuser. Everyone always seems curious how someone ends up in a relationship marked by domestic violence. I didn't think I could. In 2011, I was heartbroken and full of self-doubt after a difficult breakup. I had always dreamed of a simple life, a home, a family, and to be a mother. I had a full scholarship, a teaching degree, a job.
I was on track. But after the breakup, I felt small and unwanted. When a mutual acquaintance reappeared, he made me feel special, cherished. What I didn't recognize were the red flags. He was charming, always present, and lavished me with gifts and apologies after even the smallest disagreement. It felt like love, but it was control. Only my best friend, now my husband, warned me not to marry him so quickly. Everyone else, including my parents and pastor, were won over. So I married him, and the abuse started on our honeymoon. At first, I dismissed it. Maybe
stress, maybe his past, but it escalated. He became violent, controlling, and unpredictable. I learned to avoid upsetting him. I lost touch with friends, kept dinner ready, avoided saying no. He'd break down doors, shake my car, run it off the road, and threaten my safety. I learned how to dodge flying objects and endure terrifying screaming. He even harmed my dog, all to exert control. Eventually I left, but he did what abusers do best. He charmed everyone again. Convinced my parents, cried to my pastor, so he tried on-base counseling.
That counselor told me I wasn't trying hard enough to save my marriage if I was preventing pregnancy. I became pregnant with Chael during that time. During pregnancy, the abuse shifted, less physical, more mental. He told me he wanted nothing to do with our child until he was a teenager when he'd take him from me. After Chael was born, his jealousy grew. He refused to help, refused to bond. Chael had painful health issues as a baby, and I was overwhelmed and isolated. He finally allowed my aunt to come help, and through her, my family finally saw what I was living with. One night after a particularly frightening episode, my aunt stayed up all night holding
Chael while I slept. The next morning, my family came with trash bags and got us out. We hid in a house he didn't know about. I remember sitting frozen, holding my son, terrified he'd walk in and find us. That's what people don't understand. The most dangerous moment is when you leave. I believed he would kill me. I left my phone behind so he couldn't track me. The next Monday, I went to the courthouse, shaking, afraid he'd shoot me on the sidewalk. I almost turned around, but my aunt looked at me and said, this isn't about you anymore. It's about what shale needs. That was the moment I found courage. After he lost his temper in court and told everyone he knew better for his child than some doctor,
I was eventually granted full custody, and he was given what our judge called the strictest visitation agreement he'd ever arranged. It included a step down of supervised visitation over many months. He didn't end up having to do any of that as he deployed after his final court hearing and came back from being away a year to taking our son alone overnight. Rules never seemed to apply to him. I found out during the course of our court process that he had aggravated assault charges in college where he threatened roommates with a firearm and stalked an ex-girlfriend. Those were dropped. He had a felony sexual assault charge from a woman that refused him,
and he stalked the year before me in another state that he settled. This guy just couldn't seem to get any consequence to stick. I was not an isolated event in his life. This was an established pattern of behavior, and it didn't matter. over the past 12 years he sent my son back to me in the middle of an allergic reaction from a life-threatening peanut allergy that he doesn't think is real with a handprint on his bottom from my son asking if he could stay inside to play instead of going outside and sick more times than I could count he sent him back to me as a toddler who would come home put his back on the
wall and scream and sob hysterically not allowing anyone to touch him or comfort him for hours I could tell you 12 years worth of trauma but it would take days to tell jail isn't treated like a child he's treated like a possession an object of power an object used to get years of revenge on me he's teased mocked and mistreated on a regular basis by his birth father as he's gotten older he spends the months before his twice a year visits having nightmares about going and begging me to help him and not make him go this past sunday my big seventh grade boy collapsed on the floor in tears and wanted me to hold him because he realized he'd be picked up on
Tuesday for two weeks. He begged me to find a way for him not to have to leave. He told me that even though I've never shared the reason I left, he knows, and that he's sorry for the years I spent with him before I did leave. He said that his biological father has no business around children and that he hates women. At 12, he has to maneuver a grown adult who refuses to control their own impulses and emotions, and I'm not there to protect him. And it feels like our current culture protects him, allows him to torment child during Skype calls and visits while we follow the rules
and don't confront him, don't interfere, don't speak ill of him. Our custody arrangement is the binder of our tongues and laughable to the abuser. As a mother, your most important purpose in life, the most basic of expectations is to protect your child, and I'm not legally allowed to. It was the most tempting of reasons that I chose to stay. The first reason, as I mentioned earlier, was fear. The more compelling reason was him. You see, if I stayed, I would have been there to step in between Chael and his father. I would have been there to shield him from the abuse. My family reasoned with me that if I did leave, the majority of our time would be safe,
normal, quiet, happy. But the high price of that safety would be putting him at risk alone on a regular basis for 18 long years. Even with the most strict visitation and custody arrangements our judge had ever granted, that was the catch. Which brings me to my Christmas list. I realized that accomplishing even one of these things would make a major difference in many children's lives in this state. I don't know if any of this today will actually help my own child, but it's worth it if it helps someone's. I was thrilled to learn only Arkansas and Utah have protections with a lethality assessment, and I think there's an opportunity to lead the nation in protecting
kids too. To put this together, I looked at the issues I've personally experienced with CHAL over the past 12 years, how the current system fails to protect children, how they have no voice in custody cases, and how even clear patterns of abuse are ignored unless they fit an extremely narrow definition. I researched Laura's law in Arkansas and the lethality assessment process used in DV cases and looked for ways to extend those protections to kids. Right now that system is broken, leaving children vulnerable even when there's a known history of violence. I'd love to see if there's a way to fix that. Speaking from the perspective as a mother broken by legally not
being able to protect my child from years of constant abuse, any protection for kids would be an improvement at this point. Even in my small circle, I have several friends who echo these issues and concerns with their children as well and I feel burdened to give a voice to our kids so here's my Christmas list the first item an ad litem automatically assigned in domestic violence cases with safeguards this would ensure children have legal representation focus solely on their best interests preventing external influence children often have no voice in DV cases
lawyers focus on the adults not the child's needs there have also been cases of bribery of ad litem, speaking from personal experience. After one of our ad litem possibilities was offered a trip to Hawaii, and no, I'm not exaggerating, I became very disillusioned with the current selection process. Courts need to have a designated ad litem and take special care to remove parents from the equation and truly get to know the kids and what they need. My second item, all communication and suspected DV cases must go through a court monitored app. This would create accountability and prevent continued manipulation or abuse
through communication. Abuse continues because there's no accountability unless the victim takes the abuser back to court, and verbal abuse is often dismissed as hearsay. There's nothing stopping my ex-husband from repeatedly texting me, screaming at me on the phone, attempting to bully me, and harassing me on a regular basis. The same goes for Chael once he gets his own phone. His father will have unlimited access to his phone number to manipulate, harass, and intimidate him regularly. item three a prior history of violence must be considered as a pattern of behavior this would prevent courts from treating each incident in isolation recognizing long-term
abuse patterns courts currently overlook past behavior and only consider recent incidents rather than evaluating an abuser's overall history after each court date history is essentially a clean slate none of our abusers passed even his past with us matters after the current court date the judge won't allow any testimony of previous infractions his father has broken every line of our decree every single item and it doesn't matter anymore my next item children demonstrating fear or discomfort should have input on visitation you could even have third party validation like
teachers or counselors this would give children a say in visitation when there are signs of distress ensuring their concerns are taken seriously children have no say in custody or visitation until they turn 18 even if they show clear signs of trauma current Arkansas law only really restricts visitation for drug use, visible abuse, or sexual abuse, leaving many forms of harm that would form long-term drama unchecked. I don't tell Chael much about the legal inner workings of our case. I try to preserve his innocence as best I can. However, as he gets older, his
Lindsay Duncan
Unverified
17:29
questions have gotten very mature. He knows that I'm speaking with you today about kids like him. I asked him
if he could say one thing to you, what would it be? He said, please help kids like me. We deserve rights, too. We need to have an opinion, and if we don't want to go on a visit,
Speaker 19
17:51
listen to us. My next item. Do not assume abuse doesn't extend to children just because it was directed at a partner. This would recognize that abusers are more likely to harm children either directly or as a means to control their ex-partner. Courts assume that if a parent is abused by their partner,
they won't necessarily harm their child, when in reality children are even more vulnerable. It was explained to me that it didn't matter what our abuser did to me. He'd still have unrestricted access to jail. The thought of that is ludicrous. Here we have a violent, unpredictable, grown man, and we hand him a tiny child who can't defend themselves at all. We say, oh, that behavior is only triggered by other adults, but we don't acknowledge that children make mistakes that also trigger them, and they aren't as skilled as walking on eggshells. We give the most dangerous people full access to the most vulnerable with unending redos.
my next item future violent episodes should immediately trigger visitation review this would prevent ongoing harm by ensuring a single violent act can lead to immediate changes in custody currently unless the victim initiates an entirely new court case violations of custody arrangements and continued abuse can go on for years without consequences it costs me around fifteen thousand dollars each time we go to court i don't have that laying around i'm fortunate enough that our families can help in case of emergencies and i wouldn't hesitate to sell a car or whatever I had to do to protect him, but that just isn't an option for everyone.
When he violates our decree, like taking Chael across the state lines or not allowing him phone access, for example, he gets away with it and he knows it. Many times, Chael has asked him why he's not letting him call me or why he's taking him somewhere else, and he has laughed in his face and said that his decree is more like a guideline than an actual rule he has to follow. He has no consequences. The decree at this point only limits me. We grant decrees because we assume they'll be followed, but you have to remember the audience you're giving them to they wouldn't be in the situation to go to court for this if they followed the rules of society in the first place there has
Speaker 29
19:44
to be some way to document and provide accountability for their violations quickly and excessively so that they'll stop this
Speaker 27
19:51
behavior my last item orders of protection should automatically extend to children in domestic violence situations until reviewed by the
Speaker 19
19:58
court this would ensure immediate safety for children preventing loopholes where abusers maintain access to them. Orders of protection rarely cover children of DV victims, leaving them exposed even when a parent's protected. Since these orders must be reviewed in court anyway, extending them temporarily would provide critical protection. I told you earlier what my lawyer said
to me when I went to apply for our order of protection. Covering me would be easy, but getting shale covered would be almost impossible. There's no logical reason not to be overly cautious when children are involved. They deserve our highest level of concern and protection from these situations, not just to be treated like an add-on. I know I'm asking for a lot. I know there's laws in place and reasons for policies, but I'm telling you as someone in the system that it's not working. The system is broken, not for the adults, but for the children left completely unprotected by it. I have so many people in my life at this point that I've crossed paths with that sadly share
our stories and concerns. I've watched Shale walk through 12 years of hell in this situation that he didn't ask for. He's paying for my naive actions, and it's not his fault. Instead of looking through the lens of what his abuser's rights are. I'd love to see the frame shift to what Chael's rights are. I'd love to answer any questions you might have for me, and I promise to be completely open. I know I probably won't ever have a chance to speak for an audience with this sort of impact on his life, and I'm grateful you've given me the opportunity to speak with you today. You have the power to change this, not just for Chael, but for the thousands of children in
Arkansas who are still voiceless in our courts. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Duncan. I appreciate your, you being here
Laura Calhoun
Unverified
21:30
today and your testimony and sharing your story. Um, are there any questions of chairman Wendahlia or Stunkin? Representative Clowney, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
21:50
Chair. Thank you so much for being here today and sharing your story. I can't imagine how hard
it is and I appreciate it. If you wouldn't mind, I just was wondering a little bit more about the ad litem piece. Can you let the committee know a little bit just what that is and where you saw problems in the process?
Speaker 19
22:06
um is it on okay absolutely thank you um so originally in our original custody case we didn't have an ad litem
Lindsay Duncan
Unverified
22:16
um we actually went until he was six and um his father became very angry when i became pregnant with my second child and so he took us back to court um and the ad litem was wisely assigned by our our new judge um there were options given to us to find an ad litem and I think that's where the problems arose because the ad litem that he selected he was
stationed in Hawaii at that point and he offered to bring the ad litem out on a vacation and tour her around Hawaii so thankfully I have a bulldog of a lawyer that didn't let that happen and secured a much more appropriate ad litem for our child that was more interested in the case than going to Hawaii so that crisis was kind of averted but it easily let me see where letting the parties involved to have any input and picking an ad litem could be very problematic
it needs to be something completely unbiased thank you and if I
could add something uh representing Clowney and and the I think the judicial council and the judges will speak to this um we don't have enough ad litems and we don't have the resources and that's one of the the things that really impacts these cases uh courts may oftentimes will want to appoint simply don't have anybody to appoint or the funds to pay them and that's something that
they're going to address i think in more detail
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
23:52
here in just a little bit Representative Eubanks, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr.
Chair. I apologize. I didn't catch your name, but I appreciate you coming and sharing your story. I can relate to that because my daughter went through something very similar, and it was It was in another state. It was in Kentucky, and before any divorce papers were filed,
her attorney suggested just out of safety for her to come back to Arkansas. And so we did that, but that did eventually complicate things considerably. Now, they had somebody assigned. it was called a front of the court which I assume is something similar to an ad litem so but as far as how some people can be so manipulative that I think she that friend of the
court actually got influenced by this you know my former son-in-law but But I think I understand where you're coming from, and I'm termed out, but I hope my colleagues will work on this in the coming sessions because we do need to do things that will address this issue and protect victims of domestic abuse and all of the consequences that go with that.
But I'm just saying that my former son-in-law is lucky he's still alive. But anyway, I understand and I appreciate you coming forward. This is a real problem. And I hope Chairman Dalby will be on the forefront of this. i think representative ashley hudson has had some bills that maybe have addressed part of this at one time but anyway so thank you for being here speaker evans
Chair
Unverified
26:02
chair um members thank you for your attention uh to this today and referencing back to house bill 1829 uh that this committee took up during the session as miss duncan mentioned her sears and roebuck wish list uh there were some of those items that i believe were included in that bill and so i know the diligence uh and the legal minds that are on this committee and so these items have been have been vetted ahead of time back during session and was grateful that
this committee passed that bill out without dissent uh went to the house floor passed with 94 votes out of without dissent and i think part of that is is one because as we see quite often when when something comes out of this committee to the house floor uh with the unanimous vote like that that this body knows that it is real uh and it is important and it is something that affects lives not only to those that we know but to many of the constituents in our districts and
this is this is an issue that continues to to get worse as time goes on unfortunately as chairman dauby mentioned ran into a couple of snags on the senate end and it really had nothing to do with the content of the bill. It had a lot to do with just some timing and some personalities that were involved. As Ms. Duncan had mentioned, she calls me neighbor, and that is
because in 2001, when we moved to Cabot, we actually became across the street neighbors from uh lindsey and her family uh watched her grow up uh watched her become uh the the very fine young lady that she is a fabulous educator was a finalist i believe for arkansas teacher of the
year um second generation i believe uh an educator uh just really really grounded strong christian people and also attended the same church with her and her family and so while neighbors we lived across the street through this whole situation that she has talked about and I have to believe as I as I listened to her testimony and Lindsay thank you for your courage
and being here today and being this voice but what I also was able to listen to was the solemnness of this committee you had the attention of the folks in this room and I think that's twofold one because you did a great job with your with your story but I believe that and if we pulled this body and said raise your hand if you know someone who's lived this everyone on this committee knows someone who has lived this so it's real to us it's real to our families and it's real to our
constituents in our districts and again I'm grateful that you took the courage today to come to be that voice and to share your story and I can assure you that with working with chairman Dalby and with vice chairman Underwood in this body that throughout this interim this will get full attention and through the cooperation that i believe that we have with the with the courts and with the judicial system
we are going to address this sears and roebuck christmas list and while i can't promise that we will get all those items done you will have our full attention to do the very best that we can to help be a voice through the legislative process for kids just like chael thank you mr chair representative Hudson you're recognized thank you mr. chair and thank you so much
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
30:15
for being here your testimony brought me to tears several times and so I'm so sorry for everything you've gone
through we did talk quite a bit about these types of issues in the last session and and I know that representative Dalby has worked very hard on them but I wanted to see if you were able just for the benefit of the members of the committee to talk to us a little bit about the process for obtaining an order of protection and what you had to demonstrate and and kind of the steps you had to go through to obtain
Speaker 27
30:48
that order so i i'm not sure if it's changed um in the past 12 years but
Speaker 56
30:53
i had to go in on a monday morning to um our courthouse in
Lindsay Duncan
Unverified
31:00
our county and i had like a half sheet of paper with lines. And that's what I had to tell why I needed,
Speaker 56
31:08
um, the order to protect myself and jail. Um, I had spoken with my lawyer ahead of time, um, about how to best use that space. And so my aunt and I went
Lindsay Duncan
Unverified
31:20
in and I crammed tiny writing, probably two lines per line that
they gave me. And I had to just list, not even in complete
Speaker 56
31:28
sentence form because it wouldn't fit, But just a list of specific examples of abuse that had occurred, and I tried to divide that evenly between myself, and then I tried to also divide that between Chael because my lawyer at the time was pretty positive that even though he was two months old that it wouldn't extend to him.
um but I just it was just a bulleted list and then I waited um for news on if it would be granted or not and um in a couple of hours they came out and said that the judge had decided to grant it to jail myself but it's a temporary order and so I believe we had to go back in a month or two to actually sit in front of the judge um with him um and see if it would be extended and it was for me but at that point in time things were lifted for jail and that's when
supervised visitation was arranged between that temporary hearing and our final court date a few months later he was served and then he had to he had to vacate our our home which I wasn't there anyway at that point but he had to stay I don't remember the exact measurement a certain amount feet away from us at all times until that final order and so since it was lifted for my son I
couldn't be at those supervised visits because I was still under the order and I was expressly told that if you allow the order to be broken in any way if you accept a phone call if you accept a text if you see him at all you're as good as done you know you might as well not even go through trying to fight for custody at that point because surely it's not that big of a problem if you're allowing it and so I had to get a different I had to get a burner phone with a different number and all of that but I stayed away and my parents actually supervised the visits at
that point until our final date during that temporary hearing so I don't know if that answered your
question. Ms. Duncan I don't see anybody else in the queue to ask
Laura Calhoun
Unverified
33:50
a question but I'll just echo some of the comments that was made by our committee and speaker Evans you know we appreciate you coming here sharing your story I know that's difficult to do but we're greatly appreciative of you being willing to share that with us today without your your excuse next up I believe we have Beth Sanders
and it looks like um and i don't i'm gonna apologize if i get this name if i pronounce this name wrong barbara maroney is that correct if you guys don't if you guys both want to come at the same time that'd be fine looks like you're from the same organization if you wouldn't mind when you're there just stating your name and here with for the record and then you're recognized to proceed thank you so much I'm Beth Sanders I'm
Speaker 61
34:46
the executive director of the Arkansas Coalition Against Domestic
Speaker 63
34:52
Violence and I'm Barbara Mariani I'm the legal counsel for
the Arkansas Coalition of Domestic Violence and before they begin their discussion are there part of the the presentation we have worked they brought legislation that came before this committee during the session this year they've also helped in the bill that we presented that we're talking
about today in some suggestions they've been a very valuable resource sometimes we didn't always agree but that's that's the lawyer and all of us that got in the room that day and talked about it But they have been a very valuable resource to this committee and in our efforts on domestic violence.
I just wanted to say that, and I really appreciated them coming today. Thank you so
Speaker 61
35:43
much, Representative Dalby, and thank all of you for allowing us this opportunity to talk today. I also want to thank the woman that just spoke, the survivor, for telling her story.
At Coalition, you may or may not be aware, but we have a membership of 27 domestic violence emergency shelters in Arkansas that serve all 75 counties and the story that she told you this morning her her life situation could be echoed and magnified and multiplied many many times based on what we hear directly at coalition from survivors in the state and from the 27 shelter programs that are serving survivors all over the state it's not an isolated situation it's happening to a lot of people in
Arkansas. What has happened, the system has been very difficult to navigate. It's different in different areas of the state. So what might work in one area doesn't always work in another area. So it's not uniform. It's not always clearly understood. I think that part of the reason that we really support this work is it also leans on accountability for offenders and safety for victims. And I think everyone in this room would agree that that is at the end the day our goal and so we are in support of this and um are ready to do whatever it takes to help
make this the state a safer place for survivors
Speaker 65
37:06
um it's legal counsel i just wanted to give you a perspective i actually for the past two years have been doing majority of work in orders of protections we started a pilot program in pulaski county to provide legal free legal counsel to victims of domestic violence who cannot afford attorneys and so I've seen firsthand the filings of orders of protection I just wanted to give you just a little snapshot of Pulaski County and then
you can multiply that across the state of Arkansas so we've had 524 clients in just 2024 that's fiscal year 2024 of those 524 clients we filed 304 orders of protections we have an e-filing system in place with attorney review here in Pulaski County and then of those cases we represented an actual court we have enough staffing to represent clients in three courts only three of the courts and of those three courts that year we did 137 cases and talking
about children of those 137 cases 137 are parents right but in those 137 cases we had 196 children associated in those cases so that was 196 children just in those three courts for their hearings so that's a total of 333 clients in court alone so what this bill does when you look at it from a legal aspect is it makes the playing field equal for everyone the problem that we currently
have with the way the statute is is that it is not very concise and doesn't give guidance to judges on how to move forward. What this would do would give that guidance. Why that guidance is important is justice shouldn't depend on what jurisdiction you're in, right? So what happens in Pulaski County should be the same as what happens in Hot Springs, should be the same that happens with Mountain Home or Mountain View. Everyone should be on the same playing field. That's what this bill does. This bill improves the process which helps domestic
violence victims, it helps judges and courts, it helps court staff, and honestly, it also helps respondents, because we want fairness for the respondents also. Everyone should be treated fairly, and that's what this bill does. We value the bill, the equality that this bill would bring about, which we really don't have now, and I can speak to that by experience. I practice in Pulaski County, but I field on calls from all the domestic violence shelters and honestly we have 72 different um clerks offices where orders of
protection can be filed and right now um we have 72 different ways that judges can do that that creates a lot of problem um so this bill fixes that problem uh the other thing is uh i really just do not see a drawback i mean that's what it is does this bill make life better for everyone involved the answer is yes does this bill move things forward and make it the system our justice system better yes why wouldn't we want to do something that makes the system better
and for those reasons we support that bill
i don't see anybody in the queue but does anybody on the committee
have any questions for these witnesses seeing none i don't i don't have a question but i would like to add something to that. In my former life, I've handled domestic violence cases down in southwest Arkansas, northeast Texas, and they're exactly right. There's not enough advocates. We were fortunate
that we have a domestic violence center in Texarkana that serves both the Texas side and the Arkansas side, and so when there was a domestic violence, the victim or the person making the allegation could go to that center they would help prepare that paperwork so we didn't have that just that half a sheet of paper that Ms. Duncan talked about that she had to put everything on they would they would get everything ready they would get the paperwork ready they would walk them and help them all the way through the process which has made a tremendous
difference we don't have that throughout the whole state of Arkansas and that's somewhat what Barb's talking about here in pulaski county that that they do and that she fields those questions from other areas we have that gap not everybody has that resource some of the larger areas do but you get out in the rural areas they're given they literally will go to the courthouse and have to fill out in handwriting you know a little half a sheet of paper to say why they need that
and they don't have those advocates.
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
42:02
Representative McCullough, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And you may have just touched on that a little bit, Chair Dalby, but Ms. Sanders and Ms. Mariani, have things changed in those 12 years on the orders of protection and how you
Speaker 65
42:19
do that? Overall, I would say very little. Now, Texarkana is an exception because they have a dedicated funding stream for their coalitions for domestic violence
and attorneys to represent people for free. So that's changed for the better and works very well. Northwest Arkansas is the other one. There's a domestic violence shelter there. They're able to hire two attorneys, and so you have legal representation. It's much better there. And, of course, Pulaski County, now that we've started the program there. Just to give you an example, what it used to be in Pulaski County prior to me joining the coalition and getting this program off the ground is a victim would go into Pulaski County and have to do six to seven stops, different stops, within that courthouse just to be able to file.
And it was a limited form. That makes it more difficult for the judges also because they only have this little blurb that's handwritten. And so we've changed all that now. And in our program, it's one stop. We go to the court advocate, and everything can be electronically filed. I'm on call for access, and they can get that filed. So that's the huge difference, honestly. Follow-up, please. You're recognized.
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
43:31
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So is there a push to do
Speaker 74
43:34
this across the state, and what kind of actions have to happen for that to happen?
Speaker 67
43:40
Yes. This program was started as a pilot program, and I wanted to create it so that it
Speaker 65
43:46
could be implemented in any jurisdiction, so it can be implemented in other jurisdictions if other jurisdictions want to implement it. The problem, as we all know, it always is, is lack of funding. Attorneys cost money, so those jurisdictions have to have funding. They either have to get grant funding or the state has to give a dedicated funding stream like Texas. So that's always a huge issue. If we had the funding, yes, we could do this across the state.
I don't see anybody else in the queue, but I appreciate you guys being here and taking the time to speak with us today. Next up, I
have Judge Amy Moore. If we could have a couple of judges here. We have Judge Hale and Judge Moore. Absolutely. They're part of the Judicial Council that this bill originated from. and when you're ready if
you don't mind just uh stating your name and here with
just for the record and then you're welcome
Speaker 78
44:51
to proceed i'm judge butchale district judge for sherwood
Speaker 79
44:57
and i'm judge amy moore i'm a circuit judge covering perry and pulaski counties in central Arkansas. Thank you so
Speaker 81
45:06
much for allowing us to be here this morning. I hear orders of protection cases twice a month in Pulaski County and a firm believer in this bill. You know as Chairman Dobby started our meeting this morning she asked us to pray for the victims of course
appropriately in the flooding that just occurred. Let me take you back to 2016 when a young man walked into a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, and executed 26 people. That may have been stopped had the fact that he had been charged previously with a domestic violence charge been submitted to the principle that goes throughout the nation warning people that they cannot purchase a gun if they've had a charge of domestic violence, which this bill covers. It streamlines that process, sending out the notices to the ACIC and NCIC process
So something like that hopefully won't ever occur again. So I strongly support this bill. It's got all kinds of wonderful protections for the victims, like the victim that just testified that did such a wonderful job. And so I can't urge you enough to support it, get behind
Speaker 79
46:23
Thank you. So, and thank you, members, for being here today. this is so incredibly important. My docket includes more than 200 orders of protection
every year, and I also handle companion custody cases. I deal with more than probably 1,000 cases involving custody, and so I see both sides of the coin. This is something that I'm also passionate about because I've done extensive research and writing about childhood trauma and adverse childhood experiences. And being in a household where there is domestic violence makes children who are in that household four times more likely to either become
Speaker 83
47:05
victims themselves as adults or to become abusers.
And so any intervention that you as our legislative body can create to stop that cycle will save lives. and, quite honestly, when it comes to childhood adverse experiences, will improve the health and well-being of our communities. With regard to House Bill 1829, I obviously very much support this. I think that as a judge, it's really important to me to have a clearly written law in front of me
that I can follow and know what to do with. And this bill, the current law as it stands, is a very, very good law. But right now, course of control is not included in the definition of domestic abuse. It is listed as a remedy so that if someone comes to my court and they are experiencing domestic violence, I can order that the abuser no longer engage in what's a course of control,
but I can't consider that in determining whether or not the person in front of me is experiencing domestic violence. And quite frankly, course of control is one of the most serious red flags when I see a domestic abuse case. The lethality of that situation is magnified immensely whenever there's a course of control present. And so we need the recommended or the suggested amendment that incorporates that into the definition of domestic abuse. In addition, this bill adds additional protections that address the financial exploitation that often happens in domestic violence situations.
Many times those who are victims are either unable to leave a situation or they are much more likely to return to a situation if the abuser has control of the bank accounts, if the abuser is able to keep important documents from them that would prevent them from being able to go rent an apartment. And this bill would incorporate those additional protections that would eliminate or at least mitigate the financial control that often happens in these situations.
And finally, and most important with regard to what this bill does, is that it includes language about domestic violence intervention programs. oftentimes domestic abuse continues because oftentimes abusers have been in households where they have witnessed domestic violence and domestic violence intervention programs are evidence-based programs that address the root cause of the problems and can help stop that cycle and help stop that abuse so that there are no further victims who who fall into the hands of
someone who is perpetrating that abuse, and I think that's extremely important. It's already been touched upon here that funding is an issue, and I've been fortunate to be part of the pilot program that Ms. Mariani was up here talking about. I'm one of the judges that handles those cases, and we've worked to find some grant funding to help fund domestic violence intervention programs because there is a cost, but that is something that I just want to put that bug in your ear that that is something that I think would be an extremely wise investment
that would yield returns in the way of saving lives and protecting the health and well-being of families. And then I want to just make a plug for one other legislative intervention to consider. This last legislative session, Representative Hudson was involved in putting forth a bill, I believe it was House Bill 1434, that would have provided some additional clarity in custody cases for what we as judges can do. And as that law is currently written,
and to be clear, I support joint custody. I share joint custody of my three minor children with my ex-husband, and fortunately we don't have this situation. It's a good law, but it currently provides no guidelines for how judges are supposed to address visitation in cases involving domestic violence. And I heard that as one of the wish list items that Ms. Duncan expressed when she came up here. That bill also does not tell judges what we are to consider and how we are to, what we're
supposed to consider in terms of how we're going to address custody. It just says we shall consider the impact of domestic violence. It does not tell us how. And finally, that bill included specific language that would authorize and encourage the use of attorneys ad litem, which is another item that is on Ms. Duncan's wish list, and I cannot overstate the importance of attorneys ad litem in these cases. And again, I mean, you've heard that that program also needs additional funding
because we need attorneys who have specialized training in domestic violence and child development who are qualified to come and provide services in these situations to advocate for these children and for these families. And with that, if you all have any questions that you would like to ask, I know Judge Hale and I would be happy to address any. Are there any questions from the committee? Seeing no questions, I appreciate
your time here today. Appreciate it. Thank you so much.
Chairman Dalby, I don't have anybody else signed up, but do you have additional witnesses?
Laura Calhoun
Unverified
53:05
We do. Okay. If you wouldn't mind, just stating your name and herewith for the
Speaker 88
53:09
record, and you're recognized to proceed. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Laura Calhoun. I'm a staff attorney at the Administrative Office of the Courts, and while I help judges with a lot of things going on in circuit judges, domestic relations and probate and ad litem is domestic violence is kind of where a lot of my
area is focused. Okay, I think that Judge Moore did a good job explaining the bill, so I won't go into more detail other than to point out a few things that I think the bill kind of addresses with Lindsay's testimony and her Christmas list. One of the, section four of the bill talks about adding in specific relief that judges can request. And a lot of this can already be done
under the law right now, but it gives the petitioner the ability to know they can request that relief and the respondent to know that could be coming. And so she talked about only being able to communicate by like an application. And so when we had this request, we amended the bill and said that's a good thing to put in there, like a good idea when you've got domestic violence situations, a judge could order that they can only communicate by an app if there's going to be a final order of protection because that keeps everybody safe and also can order an attorney ad litem to be appointed.
Those were kind of some of the suggestions that we had gotten from Lindsay and we had gone in and kind of amended the bill. Another one of her things was part of her story that resonated with me listening to it and part of this bill is there's Section 8 of the bill adds in where someone violates an order of protection. So if there's an allegation, you know, you've gotten a final order of protection, you've gone to court or a temporary order of protection. If someone's been served with that and then they violate that order of protection, you know, that's serious.
If someone is willing to go, you know, and just go ahead and violate it, even though a court's ordered them, this section of the bill requires an expedited hearing. So that kind of addresses some of that when someone, like she said, keeps violating orders and things like that. So those are kind of some of the parts of the bill that I think we're addressing some of Lindsay's story that we haven't, I don't know, that's been clarified here. Another thing I wanted to talk about was the ad litem, the issue of not having enough ad litems.
That is an issue we hear from judges and parties over the state pretty often. Our budget for domestic relations attorney ad litems is different from dependency neglect attorney ad litems. This is only in domestic relations and probate, not in the juvenile sector dependency neglect. So our budget is separate, and it's the administrative office of the courts, we submit these payments through a process. And the budget right now is $396,750.
I will tell you, we run out pretty quickly. We definitely don't have the funds to cover what Lindsay was suggesting with an ad litem appointed in every single domestic violence case. That's just to give you kind of a snapshot of that. There just aren't funds for that overall from the general appropriation for that. Also, to give you an idea of the ad litems in this field, it was $90 an hour and was recently increased by Judicial Council to $125 an hour,
but there's a cap of $1,250 per case. um so there's also the issue of paying encouraging people to be attorney attorney's ad litem um because of that fee i think as lindsey pointed out she's paid fifteen thousand dollars you know when she's opened these cases so that kind of gives you a snapshot of of that because i know that that's what we've been talking about a lot here is attorney's ad litems um but other than
i'll just take questions i think that was is there anything
else that okay i was going to just uh for the committee's uh benefit on attorney ad items
you know there are some counties in our state that have no attorneys and so if they're going to be appointed attorney ad item it's going to have to come from someplace else another county so in rural areas of which there's just as much domestic violence in rural areas or in urban areas uh we're in a desert and there's no one
there to a point and the judges are always uh looking just as a personal aside to that back in my old private practicing days uh of course licensed in both texas and arkansas when you're in Texarkana I had a judge in Texas came to another lawyer and me and just Cass County Texas which was just right there next to Bowie County Texas he had no lawyers to appoint to anything
and so he said if you'll if you'll just come down on a Monday and take these appointments to help and so in our rural areas whether it's obviously whether it's Texas but certainly Arkansas because That's what we're focused on. But, you know, we don't have the manpower. And there may be a need even that we look at the law as to whether we can use some of these court-appointed special advocates to fill in those gaps and those kinds of things.
So I appreciate all the work that Laura was – this was brought to me back in January. we started incorporating the concepts that Ms. Duncan talked about. We've done the administration office of courts and the judicial council was very proactive because this was an extremely important bill to them. And then, for whatever reason, somebody thought that it was vastly changing the Domestic Violence Abuse Act,
which was not it was making it more a fairer observation is that yes I would say a lot of
Speaker 88
59:25
the changes really are technical changes in this bill if and I'm happy to take any questions on that but even the definition of course of control that Judge Moore was speaking about earlier it's already in the code it's just in a standalone statute so it's hard to interpret what that means so this just literally copied and pasted that part of the statute into the definition and some of the other parts of the bill are just kind of clarifying you file these in the circuit
clerk so that there is you know there's a lot of people that don't have attorneys helping them with this so if they're looking at these fact sheets there's no confusion about going oh to the sheriff and do it oh to the district court judges you know speeds this up for people that need this quickly so um it's a lot of this really is technical and it's it's um it just it doesn't it just updates the act the domestic abuse protection act it requires sheriff's offices to keep track of like their um their attempts to serve because one of the biggest barriers
in some of these places is you can't really move forward in a case without service of course because everyone has to be on notice and if we can't get the respondent served that causes delay for everybody and so it kind of it make it has the sheriff's office keep track of that for you and so again non-controversial technical things that just seem to help that make sense that seem to help clean it up and as these ideas come so that's that's kind of how we see it it's that are there any
Chair
Unverified
1:00:58
questions from the committee? Representative Collins, you're recognized. Thank you,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:01:04
Mr. Chair. So I'm just kind of curious, since I guess that was the issue last
time, was that somebody thought that it may be part of the issue that putting the definition of course of control in the domestic abuse definition was going to be some bigger change than it was. Just for my benefit, since I don't know where all domestic abuse is used what is the effect is it purely technical putting courts of control within domestic abuse or is domestic abuse used in the statute
in ways that putting courts of control in there would actually have a substantive change well that that could be a
Speaker 94
1:01:39
question better for the judges to answer how they're interpreted but it's
Speaker 88
1:01:43
my understanding that's part of the confusion too is that is a standalone statute so is it a definition, or is it not? I think that's part of the confusion. I think there are different interpretations, but I would probably let one of the judges answer that.
Speaker 83
1:02:01
Thank you, Representative Collins, for that question. I think it's a good one, and I do
believe that it would make some substantive changes, to be quite honest. First of all, because it is moving it over into, so that it's clearly something that we can consider as judges on the front end, whether we have a domestic abuse situation. If, you know, right now if I have a petitioner come to me who is, their phone has been taken, they are being tracked, they are being isolated from their family, they have no control of their bank account, the dog is being kicked, if they're controlling behaviors like that,
And oftentimes in true situations like this where this is happening, abusers will even know how to make threats that are vague enough so that it's not, it could be interpreted different ways. And so those iffy situations where I feel like it's pretty clear that there's a course of control happening but not actual domestic abuse, this would make it more clear for me that this is a situation in looking at the order of protection process. The second place where I think this could potentially have an impact is with the custody statute that I referenced before, because there is already reference in that law to what judges are to consider whenever there is a pattern of domestic abuse.
And that statute currently has some inconsistencies in how it refers to domestic violence, domestic abuse. It's inconsistent, which is another thing that needs to be cleared up. But I think that that could fairly be interpreted as something that could be considered in a custody case. And that may be the reason for some of the objections that you all may have heard. Gotcha. No, I appreciate that.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:03:48
And to be clear, I think it makes total sense. I get why you would want to have, in
the case, of course, control of that within domestic abuse.
But I now kind of understand a little bit better why people were treating it as substantive, because, in fact, it is substantive. It may be a good thing, but it's still
Laura Calhoun
Unverified
1:04:10
substantive. correct thank you see no further questions from the committee but thank you so much for both answering questions
and providing information thank you thank you chairman Dolly I don't have anybody else signed up unless you have some additional
witnesses I'll I have no additional witness witnesses mr. chair
members of the committee just in closing this is a bill that you heard extensive
information back in the session we wanted to bring it back forward you can see that this it's time to update and it's time to make our law follow what's happening in the real world and I appreciate everybody's come I really appreciate Ms. Duncan taking that takes a lot of courage if you've ever dealt with folks who have been involved in domestic violence
issues or situations it takes a lot of courage to stand up and to tell your story and we are so appreciative to hear her story I knew it was a powerful one we were that's why we were incorporating some of those changes I look forward during this interim to hearing from each of you as to where you think that we need to make this bill stronger what we need to add to this bill what we need to do with it to make it even a better one so that when we pass it out again,
and I have full expectations that we will pass this out again come the next term, that when it goes to the Senate, there will be no one who can stand up with a straight face and fight against a bill of this importance to all the citizens of the state of Arkansas, whether you're the one who has Whether you're the one who is a victim or whether you're the one who is the perpetrator It treats everybody the same and I see that there may be somebody who has a
question. Mr. Chair, and I'll be happy to entertain those
Representative Cindy Crawford
Unverified
1:06:06
Representative Crawford you're recognized. Thank you, mr. Chair Chairman Dalby will this also protect those who are emotionally compromised as well as physical? Yes. Them and their child? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? With that, Mr. Chair, I would make a motion that we adopt
this interim study. We have a motion to adopt the interim
Laura Calhoun
Unverified
1:06:35
study. Do I have a second? Seeing representative Springer, give
a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. All opposed?
I always have it. Congratulations. You've adopted your SP. Thank
you members. Thank you for taking your time out of your busy summer to come and hear this important discussion. Thank you.
members do you know of any other business that needs to come before this
committee for those of you who may have slipped in a little bit later we will need to have another meeting come this fall to take up some other interim studies that members have come to us with that with that I wish you the best of the rest of the summer we'll see you soon with that we are adjourned
Unknown speaker
1:07:49
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
You
Agenda
A. Call to Order
B. Consideration to Approve the September 23, 2024, Meeting Minutes [Exhibit B]
C. Consideration of a Motion to Authorize Chair to Approve Special Expenses Incurred by the Committee
D. Discussion of ISP 2025-052 by Representative Carol Dalby – An act to amend the Domestic Abuse Act of 1991; to provide for remote testimony in certain instances in a hearing under the Domestic Abuse Act of 1991; to amend requirements regarding service of pleadings or filings under an order of protection matter; to provide oversight for a domestic violence intervention program; and for other purposes [Exhibit D]
E. Other Business
F. Adjournment
Documents
Speakers
Representative Carol Dalby Chair
Unverified
Lindsay Duncan
Unverified
Speaker 19
Speaker 29
Speaker 27
Representative Kendon Underwood Chair
Unverified
Laura Calhoun
Unverified
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
Speaker 53
Chair
Unverified
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
Speaker 56
Speaker 61
Speaker 63
Speaker 65
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
Speaker 74
Speaker 67
Speaker 78
Speaker 79
Speaker 81
Speaker 83
Speaker 88
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
Speaker 94
Representative Cindy Crawford
Unverified