Tag: public safety

House Bills propose Registry of Repeat Domestic Abusers

     A bipartisan effort to create a registry of individuals convicted of repeated domestic violence is ready for consideration by the full Missouri House.

Representatives Tiffany Price (left), Raychel Proudie (center), and Ann Kelley (right) are sponsors of legislation that would create a registry of persistent domestic violence offenders in Missouri. They say it could offer people a chance to avoid entering into relationships with individuals who have a history of abuse. (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

     Bills sponsored by Representatives Ann Kelley (R-Lamar), Raychel Proudie (D-Ferguson), and Tiffany Price (D-Kansas City) would define “persistent domestic violence offenders,” and require those convicted after January 1, 2027 to be placed on the new registry.  It would work much like the existing sex offender registry, but with no address. 

     “This registry will be accessible for public inquiry, allowing communities to be informed and vigilant. While the privacy of offenders will be respected by excluding personal identification details, the community will have access to the information that could save lives,” Kelley told the House Committee on Crime and Public Safety. “By investing in these programs, we can break the cycle of violence and foster a safer environment for our families.”

     Kelly’s bill is called “Adriana’s law,” for Adriana Horton, a 12-year-old girl from Golden City, who was abducted, sexually assaulted, and murdered by a habitual domestic abuser.   

      “‘I named this proposal Adriana’s Law because I refuse to let her become just another statistic. Her name should not only be remembered in grief, but in prevention, accountability, and action. This law ensures that when we say her name in this chamber, it is tied to protection, not just tragedy,’” Kelley said, quoting a statement from a constituent.   

       Proudie’s legislation is similarly named for Brianna Johnson of Wentzville, a mother of two who was pregnant with twins when she was murdered by a persistent domestic abuser in October, 2023. 

“It was another individual who had a lot of things in their background as it relates to rape and abuse, and yet were allowed to be out in the community to continue to commit these types of violations to another person’s human rights,” Proudie told the committee. “We can attach so many people’s names to this because this is a persistent public safety issue. It’s not just public safety and then domestic violence. Domestic violence is a public safety issue.”

Price shared her own story of escaping abuse with her children. 

“From 2011 to 2016, I lived under constant fear. Domestic violence was just not physical; it was coercive control, sexual coercion, and economic instability. Every decision I made was about survival, not choice. Sometimes compliance is safer than resistance. Survival decisions are not consent; they are calculations under threat. I used to make notes and hide them all around the house with all of his information on it stating that if anything happened to me, he was responsible.”

Price said that story is not just hers.

“Locally, Kansas City had 19 domestic violence homicides last year, and KCPD South Patrol has started tracking offenders, but it’s not enough. On that list, one offender has 31 domestic violence reports filed since August, and another has 17 reports, six since August. These numbers show the urgent need for preventative measures. [This legislation] is that step. It ensures warning signs are taken seriously, survivors are supported, and systems provide timely protection.”

      House Bills 3058 (Price) and 2997 (Proudie) were combined into Kelley’s House Bill 3012 (Kelley) and passed out of the committee on a unanimous 17-0 vote.  After clearing a second committee on Thursday morning, the legislation can now come up for debate in the full House.

      These bills follow the creation of a registry in Tennessee which went online on January 1.  In its first 41 days online, nearly 40,000 people had already visited that registry.  Proudie said the legislation is modeled after what was passed by legislators there, and that it would only be applied to those who have already been the subject of due process.

      “This is for persistent offender individuals who have either pled or have been found guilty of domestic violence, with ways in which they can get off the registry over time,” Proudie said. 

“‘A domestic abuser registry is not about revenge; it is about transparency. It is about informed consent in relationships. It is about stopping repeat offenders from moving quietly from victim to victim, home to home, and state to state,” Kelley testified. 

     Proudie agreed, adding that she has been asked whether the registry is about shaming the individuals who would appear on it. 

She told the committee, “This is not about retribution, shame, or embarrassment, but like I said this morning, if that’s what these individuals feel when placed on this registry, that is an appropriate feeling for them to have. Because treating individuals like this is shameful. It is embarrassing and it’s something that they should absolutely be ashamed of.”

     The legislation would also create a “Domestic Violence Prevention Fund,” and a prevention program that would award grants using money from that fund, to support prevention and intervention services.  The fund would be supported by $50 out of a registry fee of $150, to be paid for by each registrant.

     The bill would create time frames for an offender to be removed from the registry.  Its provisions would expire in 2032, and terminate the following year unless renewed by the General Assembly.

‘Blair’s Law’ Passed Again, Sponsors Confident it will Become Law

      A mother’s nearly 13 year quest for justice for her daughter might have finally reached its end, with one of the bills passed at the end of this year’s regular legislative session.

Michele Shanahan DeMoss has visited the Missouri State Capitol regularly for the 12 years since her daughter Blair’s tragic death, advocating for passage of a law honoring Blair’s life and aimed at saving others. On the final day of the session she saw it finally passed to the governor. (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      On July 4, 2011, 11 year-old Blair Shanahan Lane was struck by a bullet fired carelessly into the air by a person more than half a mile away.  Blair died the next day.     The man who fired that gun served 18 months in prison for involuntary manslaughter.  There is no state law that addresses what is often called “celebratory gunfire.”  Every legislative session since her daughter’s death, Michele Shanahan DeMoss has come to Jefferson City in an effort to change that.

      On the final day of the 2024 session the legislature gave final passage to a bill that included Blair’s Law, to criminalize the careless discharge of a firearm in or into the limits of a municipality.

      “I woke up this morning and I said, ‘This is the day.  Let’s do it,’ and I just felt, without any hesitation, that it would happen,” Shanahan DeMoss said of that morning, and how she felt before heading to the Capitol.  She was in the House when the final vote was taken. 

Michele Shanahan Lane

      Mark Sharp (D-Kansas City) was one of the sponsors of Blair’s Law, as he has been for the past five years.  He has long seen the passion and emotion Shanahan DeMoss pours into the effort, and it became personal for him as well.

      “It’s been so important to my community,” Sharp said.  “Just in my own neighborhood, alone, on days like Fourth of July or New Year’s Eve and we have an almost three year-old daughter, and sometimes we don’t even feel comfortable sitting in our living room on the Fourth of July or New Year’s Eve because of the amount of gunfire that we can so easily hear.  It sounds like it’s on your own street, it’s so close it comes to feel like it’s in your backyard.  It’s very scary.  People have been hurt and killed, officers have been hit by bullets that come down, it’s just incredibly scary.  We hope that our prosecutor and our chief of police will work together to make some arrests.”

      Representative Sherri Gallick (R-Belton) also sponsored Blair’s Law this year.  She first heard about it directly from Shanahan DeMoss after knocking on her door while campaigning.  She decided, then, that she would also push for the legislation.

      “I believe in Second Amendment rights and with that, I believe, comes responsibility.  If you’re shooting a gun randomly it’s going to go somewhere.  Whether it goes in the air and comes down and hits a house, or hits a human, or hits an animal, there are consequences,” Gallick said.

      Blair’s Law would specify that a person is guilty of unlawful discharge of a firearm if they, with criminal negligence, discharge a firearm in or into the limits of a municipality.  A first offense would be a class “A” misdemeanor which carries up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $2,000; a second time would be a class “E” felony carrying up to four years in prison; and third and any subsequent offense would be a class “D” felony, punishable by up to seven years in prison.

      The first time Blair’s Law was truly agreed to by the House and Senate was in 2023, but it was part of a bill that included other provisions to which Governor Mike Parson (R) had objections, and because of those he vetoed it.

      Sharp and Gallick anticipate it will be signed this year.

      “Last year was a little different because it was the first time passing Blair’s Law, and it was a little surreal, so when he vetoed it I wasn’t completely surprised,” Sharp said.  “This year I have every reason to think the governor’s going to sign it.  It’s been a very emotional day for me personally.”

      Even after going through the emotional high to low of the first ever passage of Blair’s Law last year followed by the disappointment of its veto, Shanahan DeMoss did not hesitate to come to the Capitol multiple times this year to push for it again.

      “She was my only child, my entire world, and she is still my child and I am still her example, so to persevere for something that I know will make a difference is, without any hesitation, been is something that I have stood by and will continue standing by it.”

      Supporters note that one of the positives of the proposal not having passed for so many years is that it continued to garner attention throughout that time.  That publicity likely prevented at least some incidents of people firing a gun into the air. 

      Even if the governor signs Blair’s Law this year, Shanahan DeMoss, Gallick, and Sharp say they want to keep that attention up.  That is especially true as the Independence Day holiday approaches, as it is both the anniversary of Blair’s death, and it remains a time when incidents of “celebratory gunfire” spike.

      Last year the Kansas City Police Department’s SoundSpotter system – sound capturing technology that the Kansas City Police Department uses to identify potential gunshots – detected 193 rounds fired between 6 p.m. on July 4 and 6 a.m. on July 5.

      “The crime that took my daughter’s life, the crime and the irresponsibility that surrounds that crime continues to happen, and so the conversation is there, and I will always show up to support the education and whatever I can do to get people to understand.  Regardless of if there’s a law or not, people will still break the law, so I will still help to continue to educate people,” DeMoss said.

      “I don’t think that [Shanahan DeMoss is] just going to say, ‘Okay, this is done,’ because that’s not who she is,” Gallick said.  “She will continue to bring awareness to it.  I think it’s up to us, and the media, to be honest with you.  Especially around the Fourth of July, but even with celebrations with the Chiefs and New Year’s and other things that go on, people should not be firing guns recklessly.

      “She is inspiring.  She had a tragedy and she is trying to find hope and to help other people by bringing awareness to random gun shooting, and it is a problem in Missouri.  Missouri has a huge problem with it.”

      Sharp adds, “We have to keep our foot on the gas.  If that means doing interviews from here across the state to St. Louis, we have to make sure that our law enforcement is aware and our prosecutors are aware that this passed.  This is not just an issue that’s solely in Kansas City, it is an issue that’s across the state, especially the St. Louis and Columbia areas.”

      Gallick and Sharp are the latest in a long line of former House members who have sponsored Blair’s Law since 2011.

Michele Shanahan DeMoss speaks with Representatives Mark Sharp (left) and Lane Roberts (right), after the final passage of Senate Bill 754, which contains ‘Blair’s Law.’ Roberts carried that bill in the House. (Photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

      “I want them to know that I celebrate them,” DeMoss said of them, and of all the legislators who have carried the measure.  “I celebrate that they put in the effort, that they listened to me, which I know at times is probably hard because I have a tendency to go on and on until I know I’ve driven my point home.”

      Blair’s legacy continues in other ways, as well.  Six of her organs went to five people, and her mother runs a charity in her name.  Blair’s Foster Socks gives socks and other items to children in need. 

      Blair’s Law was sent to Governor Parson as part of Senate Bill 754.  He can sign it into law, veto it, or allow it to become law without his action. 

      Shanahan DeMoss, like Sharp and Gallick, believes he will sign it, and said if a signing ceremony is held, “I will be there.”

Representative, former police chief, proposes tighter stalking laws

      A state representative frustrated by years of having to tell stalking victims he couldn’t help them is sponsoring a bill to toughen Missouri statute.

      Retired Joplin police chief and former Department of Public Safety director Lane Roberts (R-Joplin) says technology has outpaced Missouri law.

Representative Lane Roberts (photo: Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications, 01-29-2020)

      “The use of technology – computers, tracking devices, cell phones – to be able to stalk and terrorize victims has grown exponentially over the last decade and our statute simply does not address it,” said Roberts. 

      “Having to look somebody who’s the victim of stalking in the eye and tell them why you can’t do things to help them out, knowing full well that they’re being terrorized by people, is a pretty uncomfortable and frustrating position,” said Roberts.  “Finally, frankly I’m in a position to maybe do something about it.”

      How Missouri law dealing with orders of protection defines stalking only covers the following of a person or unwanted communication.  Roberts’ proposal, House Bill 292, would broaden it to cover things like the use of cell phones, GPS, cameras, or third parties to observe, threaten, or communicate about or to someone.

      The House Committee on Crime Prevention heard from Janice Thompson Gehrke. She about her experience being harassed by her ex-husband, who is now in prison for shooting his ex-fiancé and her boyfriend.  This included sending his roommate to her workplace multiple times on the pretense of conducting business, having friends monitor her on social media, and using her information to have her phone spammed with contest and prize offers.

      “Now this may not seem like a big deal to some, but when you’re dealing with an abuser like him, you know there is a message being sent:  ‘I am watching you, and short of living your life completely off the grid, you’re not going to get away from me.’”

      She spoke of another victim who is being harassed through threats on social media, but the law does not allow her to seek an order of protection because, as she put it, “it’s not technically him.”

      “What we survivors ask is that you give us as many tools as possible to help set up as many roadblocks [as possible] preventing access to us so we have a chance to escape alive,” said Thompson Gehrke.

      Missouri Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence Public Policy Director Jennifer Carter Dochler said her organization backs HB 292.

      “Survivors deserve safety so we must continue to keep pace with the ways offenders find loopholes such as those that are remedied in House Bill 292.  We’re very appreciative of Representative Roberts, who filed this legislation after hearing from constituents the barriers they were experiencing with applying for a stalking order of protection,” said Carter Dochler.  “Our statute needs to be revised to keep up with the technological advances abusers have found to stalk their victims.”

      Roberts has also filed a bill (House Bill 744) that would allow victims to seek a lifetime order of protection against an individual.  Orders of protection are only valid for a year at a time.  That has been referred to a committee.

      He said throughout his career he was frustrated many times that he couldn’t do anything to help a victim of stalking and abuse, but one case frequently comes to mind in which a mother and elementary school-aged child were being abused.

      “It was so outrageous, and this individual was so convinced that because he was a man, it was ‘my way or the highway.’  I think what I said to him probably could be interpreted as a threat,” said Roberts.  “That kind of frustration, I think, exists for every police officer.  Every officer who knows that this victim is depending on them and we’re letting them down.”

      The committee has not voted on HB 292.

House budget committee votes to continue barring state funding for DUI checkpoints

The House Budget Committee has proposed a state spending plan that would continue to keep state-appropriated funds from going to impaired driving checkpoints.

Representative Kathie Conway (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications – click for larger version)

Last year the House proposed that $20-million made available for grants to law enforcement agencies not be allowed for use in checkpoints.  That proposal became part of the final budget plan for the fiscal year that began July 1, 2017.  Law enforcement agencies can conduct checkpoints but have to find other ways to pay for them.

The idea was controversial but has the backing of House Budget Committee Chairman Scott Fitzpatrick (R-Shell Knob), who cited data from the Department of Transportation showing saturation efforts – periods of increased law enforcement patrols on the roads – result in more arrests per dollar.

Representative Kathie Conway (R-St. Charles) remains adamant in her opposition to the prohibition.  She proposed letting $500,000 be used on checkpoints in the Fiscal Year 2019 budget, and argued that checkpoints are effective.

“Checkpoints are not really used to catch drunk drivers and impaired drivers.  They’re mostly to make the public aware of the risk of being caught,” said Conway.  “There’s been ten studies reported in five separate papers that the impact of sobriety checkpoints showed relative decrease in alcohol-related crash fatalities of 9-percent, and that’s just the fatalities.  Two of these studies showed a decrease of 64-percent in one and 28-percent in the other of blood alcohol content above the legal limit.”

Those who supported barring state-appropriated funds from going to checkpoints last year stood by their decision.  Representative Justin Hill (R-Lake St. Louis) said what’s happened in the last year shows it was correct.

“We were pretty confident last year when we spoke about focusing this fund to methods that work and actually remove drunk drivers off the road because after all, that is the goal – to arrest drunk drivers and get them off the road to make our roads safer,” said Hill.  “In the first six months, without using these funds to use checkpoints, we saw an increase of 15-percent statewide in DWI arrests, and you know some may say that’s kind of a long shot to say that’s due to the lack of checkpoints, but I truly believe that sometimes this body has to make tough decisions to force the hand to do what not only is right, but to do what’s effective and efficient.”

Representative Peter Merideth (D-St. Louis) supported the partial opening up of state funds to checkpoints.  He said he believes checkpoints are effective, at least when used in conjunction with other things like saturation efforts.  He also believes checkpoints are fairer.

“What I would point out is that when we rely solely on individual officers pulling over individual vehicles we have significant research and evidence that those stops much more disproportionately impact poor and minority communities, and at the very least a checkpoint is a uniform way to check everybody fairly, regardless of your color, regardless of the type of car you drive,” said Merideth.

Representative Justin Hill (photo; Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications – click for larger version)

Many backers of the prohibition on state funds being used for checkpoints say checkpoints are unconstitutional because vehicles are stopped without probable cause.  Yukon Republican Robert Ross said while he supports law enforcement and knows Conway does too, he said the issue is one of due process.

“Checkpoints are a system of being guilty until you can prove yourself innocent.  That’s exactly counterintuitive to the way this country was set up and how we should operate,” said Ross.

The committee rejected Conway’s amendment.  If that decision stands through the completion of a budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2019, the prohibition on state-appropriated funds being used for checkpoints would continue.  Conway said she would continue to try to lift it.

“I’ve stood in crowds of 200 and 300 police officers that were going out to do saturation and/or DUI checkpoints.  They’re very enthusiastic about their programs.  I’ve stood and talked with parents and spouses and children of people that were killed by drunk driving and they’re very supportive of DUI checkpoints; in some places it’s up to a 70-percent approval of the citizens where checkpoints are used,” said Conway.  “For some it simply boils down to a constitutional issue and their minds will not be changed, but I think it’s also – since it has been found constitutional under both Missouri and United States Supreme Courts – that until that changes we have to go with the constitutionality of it, and I must say that public safety is always at the forefront of most things that I do.”

The full House, when lawmakers return from spring break next week, will debate the proposal that was passed out of the chamber’s Budget Committee.  The issue could be debated again then.