Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Victim Testimony Guidelines topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Survivors tell Judiciary committee how to make testimony safer and clearer
Summary
Survivors and advocates told the Vermont Judiciary committee that simple practices — clear briefing, plain language, visible attention and safety options — make legislative testimony less retraumatizing. Committee staff agreed to draft a written guidance packet for witnesses.
Survivors and victim advocates told the Judiciary committee Friday that clearer preparation, respectful body language and safety options help people give testimony without being retraumatized.
The session, led by Angela Pullman of the Center for Crime Victim Services and three survivors who testified, aimed to give committee members concrete guidance for taking witness testimony in a trauma-informed way.
Participants said the most important changes are procedural and low-cost: tell witnesses how hearings work, explain why committee members take notes or use laptops, offer privacy or remote testimony options, allow a support person and warn witnesses that written testimony and recordings will be posted publicly.
“We always want to start from that place of believing, victims and survivors,” said Kelsey Rice, a survivor of domestic violence, describing how the tone of a hearing can affect witnesses. Rice and two other survivors — Taylor Russell (who has testified previously under the name Taylor Fontaine) and another survivor identified as Anna (last name not specified in the record) — spoke about their first experiences testifying and what helped them feel heard and safe.
Taylor Russell said her early experience testifying left her feeling overlooked. “I felt like my voice wasn't totally heard on some levels,” Russell said, explaining why preparation and follow-up matter to survivors who speak publicly about harmful incidents.
The survivors and advocates gave the committee a checklist of recommended practices: introduce committee members and staff visibly when witnesses arrive, tell witnesses where to park and which door to use, provide a brief written overview of the hearing process, allow witnesses to submit written testimony or have an advocate present it, and offer a private or blurred-camera option for remote testimony.
Angela Pullman of the Center for Crime Victim Services told the committee that advocates can help prepare witnesses and that staff should expect people will react differently to testimony. “They are really out in the community working with others,” Pullman said of survivors who serve on advisory councils and who sometimes testify to inform policy.
Speakers flagged a safety issue that committees should treat as routine: testimony and written submissions are part of the public record. Kelsey Rice described how, after serving on a public committee, she found personal contact information posted online, which required additional safety planning with local law enforcement. Committee members were urged to ask witnesses about the level of identifying detail they want included in written testimony or public records.
Witnesses and staff discussed practical on‑the‑day supports that make testimony more manageable: providing tissues, allowing breaks, having water and a quiet place after testimony, and giving witnesses the option to submit testimony through the Center or an advocate if they prefer not to appear. Several survivors said a brief, personal follow-up — even an emailed “thank you” or a short handwritten note from a legislator — can be meaningful.
Committee staff signaled willingness to act. Scotty (Nate), the committee assistant, said that if witnesses ask for orientation materials or procedural details, staff will provide them and that he will raise preparing a written packet with his supervisors. Representative Ian Goodnow and other committee members thanked the survivors and recognized the committee’s responsibility to make testimony accessible and safe.
No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the training segment. Committee business referenced for later in the day included a planned walk-through of House bills H.28, H.41 and H.44 and an adoption bill scheduled for review in the afternoon; those items were not debated in the witnesses’ training session.
The survivors and advocates who spoke asked members to treat testimony from victims and survivors as expert input on how systems operate in practice, and to keep procedure and safety in mind when scheduling and publicizing hearings.
