Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nebraska senators advance LB103 to expand shield protections for sexual‑assault victims in pretrial depositions
Summary
The Legislature advanced LB103 with amendments that clarify prior sexual‑assaults are covered by Nebraska's shield rule and require a court motion and sealed in‑camera hearing before sensitive deposition questioning. Supporters said it balances victims' trauma with defendants' rights; critics warned about indigent‑defense impacts and sealed records.
Senators advanced Legislative Bill 103 on a party‑line of procedural votes after adopting two amendments that narrow and clarify how questions about a victim's prior sexual assaults may be raised before trial.
Senator DeBoer, sponsor of LB103, said the measure "attempts to balance two legitimate competing interests" — protecting victims from prejudicial questioning while preserving a defendant's right to a vigorous defense. The bill and the white‑copy amendment agreed Wednesday explicitly state that prior sexual assaults are covered by the shield rule and add a process for pretrial depositions that requires notice, a motion and a sealed, in‑camera hearing before the court will permit sensitive questioning.
Senator Bozeman, speaking for the Judiciary Committee, described the committee amendment as preserving victims' protections while ensuring courts can still admit relevant evidence when appropriate: "AM878 preserves the victim protections purposes contained in LB103 while still allowing relevant and admissible evidence and ensuring that any sensitive questioning at deposition occurs only with judicial oversight and appropriate safeguards."
Opponents raised concerns about the bill's potential effects on indigent defense and public transparency. Senator Conrad warned that, without adequate public‑defense resources, the additional sealed hearings could "stack the deck against the accused" by making it harder for underfunded defense counsel to obtain information. She also pressed whether the sealing provisions might prevent information that could be relevant in other civil or future criminal matters from being available to the public or other litigants.
Floor action included adoption of the sponsor's white‑copy amendment and the committee amendment. The clerk recorded adoption of AM1774 (white copy) and AM878 (committee amendment) during floor proceedings; LB103 was then advanced to E & R initial for further amendment and enrollment. Supporters and several committee members said they are open to additional technical changes between general and select files to address transparency and process questions.
The bill now moves to the Legislature's next procedural stage for technical enrollment and further amendment.
