Tougher Bystander Laws in Wake of Richmond Attacks
Posted by Denise Tejada on January 11, 2010 at 02:20pm
 

State Senator Leland Yee of San Francisco has announced a proposal that would grant jail sentences for witnesses who do not report sex crimes or violent attacks on victims under the age of 18. This is the second proposal of this kind proposed in recent months. The proposals come after the gang rape that took place in Richmond, CA in October where almost twenty people watched without calling the police while a girl was raped, beaten, and robbed.

The first proposal was from Assemblyman Pedro Nava, and requires people to report any crime regardless of the age of the victim. Nava’s bill is set to undergo its first hearing on Tuesday by the Assembly Public Safety Committee. Currently, California law requires people to report a violent crime against children ages 14 or younger. The penalties for not following the law, which would remain the same under Nava's proposal, is up to six months of jail and a fine of $1,500.

The difference between Yee and Nava's proposals is age. Yee’s proposal states that the victim should be under 18, meaning a crime committed on a 19 year-old would not fall in this proposal. Nava’s proposal does not include an age limit. In the Richmond attacks, the bystander law was unenforceable because the victim was 15-years-old.

What do you think -- should there be an age limit?




Good Samaritans

I'd be interested in knowing how this connects -- if at all -- to bystander laws. As far as the legislation, I'd go with Yee's - for now -- based on his track record when it comes to youth and justice issues. Not to place value on the lives of minors versus adults, I would actively support the law regarding minors, and I'd be more skeptical of the law regarding adults. Remember, Tupac was convicted of a rape he didn't commit, but admitted culpability in.

Post new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.