Endorsements and editorials are made solely by the ownership of this newspaper. As is the case at most newspapers across the nation, The Spokesman-Review newsroom and its editors are not a part of this endorsement process. (Learn more.)

Editorial: Strengthen protections for sexual assault victims

Wed., Dec. 2, 2015

Sexual assault protection orders issued by Washington courts have a two-year term. That’s not long enough.

Legislation introduced last spring would allow judges to extend the initial period to five years, and indefinitely if a hearing establishes that a threat still exists. The change would bring the terms of the orders, known as SAPOs, into line with those of similar legal remedies covering domestic violence, stalking and harassment.

Like those other orders, a SAPO can require an assailant to avoid certain areas, such as a school campus, or stay away from the victim physically and nonphysically (electronically, for example).

Many of the actions that would substantiate a SAPO would be considered rape if filed as criminal charges. But victims may not want to go to the police, or expose their assailant to incarceration and a damaging record.

The orders do not show up on background checks and, for better or worse, they do not affect an assailant’s ability to obtain and own a firearm.

The assailants do not have to register as a sex offender.

As civil actions, SAPOs can be granted based on a preponderance of evidence. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt – the requirement in criminal cases – is a higher bar.

Still, these are not easy orders to obtain. Although 567 were issued in King County from 2010 to 2014, the total represents only half of the applications filed. Only 68 were granted in Spokane County.

The initial order can be granted using information included on a form, but if the alleged assailant chooses to challenge the application, a mini-trial is held with the alleged victim and victimizer represented by lawyers.

The process could be repeated two years later.

Under HR 2033, victims can obtain a permanent extension after five years unless assailants can show with a preponderance of evidence that there is no further threat.

The bill passed overwhelmingly in the House: 67 yeas to 29 nays. That was March 4.

The bill advanced out of the Senate Law and Justice Committee just two weeks later. But it never reached the Senate floor despite special sessions that had lawmakers in Olympia until the end of June.

In part, that was the fault of the groups that support the bill. They had not expected the representatives to act so quickly, and so did not have a senator committed to sponsoring the bill in that chamber.

Without an advocate, the bill got lost in the hubbub surrounding the preparation of a budget that adequately funds education.

Supporters say they have a tentative commitment from a potential sponsor and expect to renew their push for the bill’s passage next month.

In House and Senate hearings, the only pushback came from trial lawyers who won’t be at the pay window as often if SAPOs are extended to five years. A variety of victim advocacy groups testified for the bill.

SAPOs are the only recourse short of filing rape charges available to victims of sexual assault outside of a domestic relationship. For many, it’s a relief they can get protection without filing criminal charges.

HR 2033 should be enacted swiftly.

To respond to this editorial online, go to www.spokesman.com and click on Opinion under the Topics menu.