Information from the New York Times
The Sherrice Iverson Child Victim Protection Act requires “that witnesses report a serious crime against anyone 14-years-old and younger.” But the law does not apply in the Richmond case because the victim is 16.
State Assemblyman Tom Torlakson, represents Contra Costa County and is “exploring how to expand that law to raise the age to 16 or 18, and potentially alter it to include any person physically harmed on a school campus. He was the author of the Sherrice Iverson Child Victim Protection Act in 2000.”
Mr. Torlakson said that staff members are “researching the effectiveness of the original act, working with the California District Attorneys Association, schools and police officers throughout the state.”
State Sen. Leland Yee is also looking into how to change the law to address the age limit issue. Lee said:
My office is still researching a number of legislative remedies and we have not ruled out amending the law to include crimes committed against people of all ages. That said, crime statistics indicate that children under age 18 represent a disproportionate number of sexual and violent crime victims, so providing them additional protections is more than just appropriate, it’s our obligation.
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
This is a popular legislative idea right now. I’ve spoken to a number of legislator’s staff who are pursuing a variety of approaches to accountability for bystanders who choose not to intervene during a crime. It would be interesting to see the data that supports this approach. I don’t think that this would have prevented this case in Richmond, but it would clearly give prosecutors another standard by which to hold the witnesses accountable.