SANTA CRUZ COUNTY

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COMMISSION

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT/ANNUAL REPORT COMMITTEE

MINUTES

Meeting Date: December 3, 2002 11:30 AM

Location: Santa Cruz County District Attorney's office

701 Ocean St. # 200

Santa Cruz, CA 95060

1. Call to Order

Meeting was called to order at 11:37 a.m. Committee members present: Linda Starn, Laurie McWhorter (Chair), Alan Hiromura (Vice Chair), David Rabow and Kim Austin.

2. Additions or deletions to Agenda

None

3. Oral communications from the community

None

4. Approval of the November 19, 2002 Minutes

Alan Hiromura/Laurie McWhorter/unanimous (Rabow and Austin abstain)

5. Review DA and Superior Court questions

DAO questions - discussion had about the advantages and disadvantages of including the individual crimes by section. Disadvantages are difficult to understand and time consuming. Advantages include that an overall number will not help define what is occuring in the county. For example, if there are 500 misdemeanor filings but 400 were restraining order violations, it would seem misleading to say there is 500 misdo DV cases. The break down by charge will also allow comparison with the court numbers. However, even if the court will not break the numbers down, the advantages still out weigh the disadvantages and there was concensus to maintain the individual charges. Decided to eliminate the total question asking "how many dv cases were filed this month". This is simply addition that can be done by the commission committee.

Court questions - discussion had about identifying the sections as "Superior Court Criminal" and "Superior Court Civil". All agree. Discussion had about the feedback from Judge Stevens that the data of convictions is not relevant because of the delay in disposition compared to filing. For example a serious felony could take a year or more and so there is no direct correlation between what the DA's office files and what cases resulted in a conviction or dismissal for a particular charge. While this is true, with the understanding that the dispo's are a reflection of earlier cases, it still will give an average of what is occuring and the group decided to go forward as is. Further discussion about the importance of getting the individual crime section data because of plea bargaining. Discussion about the question "how many dv cases were dismissed this month" led to realization that this was a different category than individual charges because it is the only statistic which will say when a case was dismissed entirely or a defendant was found not guilty. The question was re-worded to say "How many dv cases resulted in no conviction on any charge"

Discussion about the question regarding defendants ordered into treatment. While we are not sure that data is available, it would be nice to have. Question regarding jail time raised similar issues. Alan Hiromura to follow up on both questions with Lorraine Price from courts.

Additionally, rather than ask each separate charge as a separate question, one question (How many of each of the following (felony or misdo) charges were (dismissed/convictions) with the crimes being listed separately.

Law Enforcement section - Data is not available for the number of warrants requested. Those cases show up the same as all open or unsolved reports. Group agreed to remove question. This is not a huge loss because the DAO question about the total number of reports submitted for filing less the number of arrests will tell us approximately how many warrant requests were made.

Discussion about the kids witnesseing DV was had. Because of the different definitions used by law enforcement vs. courts vs. What Works, it was decided not to include this information.

Discussion about Superior Court Civil questions - Decided that the final four questions are

1. # of TRO's filed this month

2. # of TRO's issued this month

3. # of Permanent RO's issued this month

4. # of TRO's requested with the assistance of an advocacy agency

Decided to eliminate the questions about number filed pro per or by an attorney but add the number issued.

Advocacy agency questions - Decided to eliminate the three question relating to shelter unless the agencies themselves wish to include this. Laurie will follow up on this issue. Decided to eliminate "for how many primary victims is this the first time they ever sought dv services" and "what is the number of primary victims receiving services".

Reworked the language so that the 5 questions are

1. How many, non duplicated, clients did you service by phone

2. How many, non duplicated, clients did you service in person

3. How many clients reported this is the first time they have experienced DV

4. How many clients reported this incident to law enforcement

5. How many clients were assisted with seeking a restraining order

The team reviewed each question one by one. Changes discussed are incorporated into the appropriate sections.

6. Review of each question and narrow down

7- 10. Continued to next meeting.

11. Next meeting scheduled 12/5/02 from 9-11 AM at 701 Ocean St. # 520 (CAO's office)

12. No Closing

10. Meeting was adjourned at 1:40 P.M.