Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the S9 After Hours Orders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Judiciary advances bill to allow after‑hours emergency orders for sexual‑assault victims
Summary
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to report draft 1.1 of S.9 favorably after testimony that the bill would extend existing after‑hours procedures for domestic abuse orders to ex parte emergency relief orders for sexual‑assault victims.
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to report draft 1.1 of S.9 favorably after testimony that the bill would extend existing after‑hours procedures for ex parte emergency relief orders to victims of sexual assault.
Committee members heard testimony from Vermont State Police and court staff that S.9 would allow victims of sexual assault to use the same after‑hours affidavit and filing procedures now available to victims of domestic assault, rather than waiting for regular court hours.
"It may only make sense to align services for victims of [sexual] assault ... with services that already exist for ... victims of domestic assault," Lieutenant Bill Beck of the Vermont State Police said, testifying that the change would broaden access to existing after‑hours protocols rather than create a new system.
Beck told the committee that after a victim files an affidavit after hours, the paperwork is routed to a judge for signature, the order is returned to dispatch, and law enforcement serves the order in the appropriate coverage area. He said service is handled by whichever agency covers the defendant's jurisdiction and that the State Police can serve orders by default.
A committee staff member clarified that the ex parte emergency relief orders at issue run on a civil track that is independent of any criminal case, and that those temporary ex parte orders remain in place for 10 days before a hearing on whether to issue a final order.
Committee members discussed technical amendments suggested by the courts to make clear the provision applies only to ex parte emergency relief orders for sexual assault, and staff said they could offer a strike‑all amendment to present all changes together on the floor.
A motion to move draft 1.1 of S.9 favorably was made and seconded; the committee recorded a roll call of five yes votes and no opposing votes. The committee also noted a procedural clarification that the evidentiary standard for relief from abuse (RFA) proceedings remains governed by existing law (preponderance of the evidence), not the clear‑and‑convincing standard.
The measure will advance to the next stage with the committee's recommendation and any agreed technical edits.
