Estimated read time: 2-3 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- A bill that would change the way Utah punishes hate crimes is undergoing major revisions as the bill's sponsor works to hammer out a compromise with another lawmaker.
Sponsored by Rep. David Litvack, D-Salt Lake City, House Bill 90 was set for a debate by the full House late Wednesday. Instead it got hung up as Rep. LaVar Christensen, R-Draper, rushed to finish drafting a substitute.
A longtime opponent of Litvack's hate crimes bill proposals -- this is his sixth -- Christensen thinks the state's existing law -- which prosecutors have said in unenforceable -- needs only a minor tweak.
Litvack's current bill would direct judges and the Utah Board of Pardons and Parole to consider evidence of bias or hatred in the selection of a victim when they are sentencing convicted offenders or considering an offender for parole.
Neither representative would offer any details of the compromise bill they are now drafting together, although Christensen said the new bill will seek to balance his concerns with Litvack's intentions.
Utah law does not technically have a hate crimes statute, even though it is titled "penalties for hate crimes." The current law is instead a civil rights statute that requires prosecutor to prove a victim's civil rights, such as voting or attending school, were interrupted by the commission of the crime.
Statistics kept by Utah law enforcement dating back to 1998 show the state averages 66 hate crimes a year.
In the past, Litvack and others have sought to enhance the penalties for hate crimes, by raising the punishment for crimes by one step if bias or prejudice in victim selection could be proved.
That approach consistently failed because it included a list of groups typically targeted in bias crimes. Among them was the classification of "sexual orientation," which House members would not support because they claimed would create special rights for homosexuals.
(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
