Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cold Case Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to give families a formal process to request homicide case reviews
Summary
AB 15 would create a formal process allowing designated family members to request a review of unresolved homicide cases; the committee advanced the bill after robust testimony from survivors and victim‑advocacy groups and assurances to work with law-enforcement concerns.
Assemblymember Gibson presented AB 15, the California Homicide Victims Families Right Act, which would create a procedure for designated family members to request a formal review of open, unresolved homicide cases. Gibson framed the bill as a tool to help grieving families obtain information and to provide new investigative leads that may assist law-enforcement in solving cases.
Multiple survivors and advocacy groups testified in support, including Janisha Grisham of Youth Alive and representatives from Moms Demand Action and Everytown for Gun Safety. Grisham, who said her brother’s killers were never caught, described waiting more than 5,000 days for answers and urged lawmakers to provide families with a structured avenue to request reviews.
Opposition testimony from the California State Sheriffs Association and several county sheriff offices said the bill’s statutory review timeline and staffing requirements could strain agency resources, prioritizing applicant-driven reviews over current investigative priorities and cold-case workflows. The Sheriffs Association also raised concerns about the statutory requirement that reviewers not have participated in the original investigation, which can be impractical for small agencies.
Committee members pressed the author and opponents to negotiate operational details. The author agreed to continue discussions and emphasized the measure was designed to create a process rather than supplant investigative discretion. The committee voted to pass AB 15 to Appropriations; several members described the bill as a needed mechanism while noting the need to protect law-enforcement capacity and small‑agency realities.
