Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Victim Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel hears bill to redact adult sexual‑assault and stalking victims' information from public records
Summary
HB 450 would automatically redact names and sensitive identifying data from public‑facing court documents for adult sexual‑assault and stalking victims; sponsors and advocates said it will reduce retraumatization and increase reporting while prosecutors and health boards described judicial access procedures.
A bill to automatically redact identifying information about adult sexual‑assault and stalking victims from public court records drew bipartisan support from survivors and victim‑advocacy groups in the House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 10.
"It protects the privacy of sexual‑assault and stalking victims by redacting their names or shielding their information from easy access on public‑facing documents and kiosks," Delegate Michelle Guyton told the committee while introducing HB 450, which extends protections already available to minors to adult victims. She said staff had searched county court records and repeatedly found unredacted victim information, including addresses and requests for interpreters.
Advocates from Turnaround Inc. and the Maryland Crime Victims Resource Center argued the redactions would reduce retraumatization and remove a chilling effect that deters reporting. Nicholas Steigerwald of Turnaround told lawmakers courts and clerks often publish victim data that can be exploited by abusers. Laura Wilt, senior attorney at the Maryland Crime Victims Resource Center, said, "No victim of sexual assault should suffer the additional pain and trauma because our identities have been revealed."
Prosecutors and health‑board representatives assured the committee the bill preserves access to needed information for legitimate investigations and professional oversight. Debbie Feinstein, chief of the special victims division in Montgomery County, said discovery practices already allow prosecutors to provide defense counsel full information when necessary; the bill would primarily limit public access while preserving judicial and prosecutorial transparency.
Members asked for clarifications about whether the redaction would be automatic at charging (sponsor: yes), how pro se defendants would obtain discovery, and whether multiple victims or cross‑charges would create dual redactions; witnesses said the bill’s intent is to protect victims' personal data while allowing parties and courts to access material they legitimately need. The transcript records no committee vote on HB 450 during the hearing.
