Governor Gets Bill on TV Use in Abuse Cases

The Senate approved and sent to Gov. George Deukmejian on Thursday major legislation to aid in the prosecution of child sex abuse cases by allowing certain children under 10 years old to testify outside court via closed-circuit television.

In the final legislative step of what had been a long and controversial battle, former opponents of the measure dropped their opposition as the Senate voted 30 to 1 to accept Assembly amendments to the bill and send it to Deukmejian. The former opponents said they were satisfied that constitutional objections had been resolved.

“We believe this is a historic step in the area of equal rights and the rights of victims, especially children,” said Sen. Art Torres (D-South Pasadena), the author.

Governor’s Position

Democratic legislators who supported the bill said they received indications that Deukmejian will sign it. However, a spokesman for the governor said he has “not committed himself to a position one way or the other” and needs more time to consider the legislation, which the Assembly passed Monday on a vote of 75 to 1.

“The bill has been amended quite a bit and obviously the governor will want to review it,” Deputy Press Secretary Bob Taylor said.

The legislation, prompted by the McMartin Pre-School molestation case in Manhattan Beach, for a time embroiled the Legislature in a divisive fight over the need to protect young victims and at the same time safeguard the rights of the accused.

Parents of children involved in the McMartin case have attended nearly every hearing on the bill and were given credit for helping to overcome heavy resistance.

Some lawmakers predicted that the measure will ultimately be found unconstitutional. But most said their concerns were resolved by a series of amendments including one limiting televised testimony to those witnesses and alleged victims who are 10 years old or younger. The original version included children up to 13 years of age.

Another key compromise was a provision that requires the young victims and witnesses to face defendants in open court for identification purposes only. Opponents had argued that mistakes could easily be made if the young witnesses were allowed to identify defendants via television. And they insisted on this confrontation between the accused and the accusers as a fundamental constitutional right.

Supporters of the bill said they were most concerned about courtroom testimony that they fear could leave the youngsters with psychological scars.

In all cases, the measure would allow closed-circuit TV testimony only when a judge determined that the victim had been threatened or would feel intimidated in providing courtroom testimony.

Balance of Considerations

“The bill is an appropriate balance of various policy considerations--a desire to humanize the courtroom and protect the small victims from intimidation and threats,” said Sen. Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and one of several senators who had earlier urged defeat of the bill. “I think this now is a good balance.”

Democratic Floor Leader Barry Keene of Benecia, who also opposed the measure in its first trip through the Senate several weeks ago, said the bill had “moved from an unacceptable risk to an acceptable one.”

Opinion remained divided on the question of whether the bill can be applied retroactively to the McMartin case. A preliminary hearing in the case has been under way since last August.

Sen. Milton Marks (R-San Francisco), who contended all along that the measure could not be applied to an existing case, pressed the question on the Senate floor. But Torres said he is convinced that it will be applied in the McMartin case, particularly if it goes to trial in Superior Court.