ILNews

Legislators to look at sex offenses, reporting laws in wake of Anthony trial

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Criminal Code Evaluation Commission is meeting Thursday morning to discuss sex crimes and sex offenders, and other issues, according to its revised meeting agenda. Later that day, the Criminal Law and Sentencing Policy Study Committee is going to take a look at Indiana’s laws regarding reporting a dead body or missing child.

The focus of the criminal code meeting is on sex crimes. Dr. Adam Deming will give a presentation on sex crimes and sex offenders, the Office of the Indiana Attorney General will give a presentation on sex trafficking; and Deborah Daniels, former U.S. Attorney and now a partner at Krieg DeVault in Indianapolis, will speak on penalties for sex offenses. Rep. Ralph Foley, R-Martinsville, and Sen. Randall Head, R-Logansport, will also give presentations at the meeting, according to the posted agenda.

Members will also discuss Indiana Code 35-43-4-3(d), conversion for failure to return a rental car. The meeting begins at 10:30 a.m. in Room 431 of the Statehouse.

At 1:30 p.m. in Room 431, the Criminal Law and Sentencing Policy Study Committee will review Indiana’s laws on reporting dead bodies. Chair Sen. Brent Steele, R-Bedford, said the discussion was spurred by the outcome of the Casey Anthony trial in Florida.

Anthony never reported her daughter missing and was later charged with first-degree murder after her daughter’s remains were discovered. She was acquitted of murder.

Currently, statute requires someone who discovers a dead body to report it within three hours or face a Class A misdemeanor charge with a possible prison sentence of up to a year and a fine that could be as much as $5,000.

Committee members will also look at possibly creating a law that parents or guardians must report a missing child immediately or within a certain time frame. The committee will also talk about implementing a new centralized child protection registry.

The proceedings will also be webcast live.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT