Safe Harbor Archives - Shared Hope International

July 22, 2024 by Sidney McCoy

2024 State Legislative Update

2024 State Legislative Update

The Shared Hope policy team has been working tirelessly this year, tracking 3,558 bills and providing technical assistance in 22 states to combat child and youth sex trafficking. Legislative measures at the state level are crucial in protecting vulnerable youth and prosecuting perpetrators. As state legislatures wrap up their sessions, staying informed about the latest updates is essential.

Our advocacy priorities have focused on victim-offender intersectionality and preventing the unjust criminalization of trafficking survivors. We have been collaborating with stakeholders and engaging on legislation related to Safe Harbor, Affirmative Defense, and Vacatur. Our Report Card framework includes 40 policy goals across 6 issue areas, and this blog reflects our efforts in these key areas.

As we continue to advocate for important bills, it is important to recognize the impact of state legislation in shaping policies and practices to protect vulnerable youth. Stay informed and join us in the fight against child and youth sex trafficking. Together, we can make a difference in the lives of survivors and work towards a safer future for all.

Safe Harbor Efforts

“Safe Harbor” refers to laws and responses that insulate victims from a punitive response and direct them to restorative and protective services. Comprehensive Safe Harbor laws should prohibit arresting, detaining, charging, and prosecuting allminors for prostitution offenses, regardless of whether a finding of trafficking victimization is made, and instead, connect child and youth survivors to specialized services and care. This non-criminalization recognizes that child and youth sex trafficking victims should not be penalized for a crime that was committed against them and should not be involved in the juvenile or criminal justice system as a result. This includes not using punitive approaches to require participation in services, such as diversion or discretionary referrals. Additionally, victims deserve access to physical, mental, and psychological support and services to help them heal and set a firm foundation for their future lives. Thus, effective Safe Harbor responses emphasize the need of victims to receive trauma-informed care, and hinges on ensuring comprehensive access to specialized services.

This year, Idaho will join the other 29 states and DC who have made it clear that children engaged in commercial sex are victims of sex trafficking, not prostitution offenders, with the passing of H 494, introduced by Rep. Lakey (R). This lawprohibits minors under 18 from being arrested and referred to the juvenile justice system on suspicion of or known engagement in commercial sex. Amending the prostitution statute to be inapplicable to minors recognizes that children never engage in commercial sex by choice; rather, a child does so out of coercion, force, fraud, fear, or survival. This is not consensual sex; money does not sanitize rape and treating the child as a consensual actor not only misplaces criminality, it directly re-victimizes the child. Children living in such circumstances deserve, at a minimum, specialized services, and long-term care, not the traumatizing impact of an arrest, detention and prosecution, or juvenile records that carry devastating collateral consequences far beyond the childhood years.

A few other states have passed laws related to Safe Harbor, too. Appropriate identification and access to services are vital aspects of creating a just response for victims of child and youth sex trafficking.

Pennsylvania passed legislation, SB 44 introduced by Sen. Dush (R), that amended the definition of trafficking to ensure that all minors engaged in commercial sex are recognized as trafficking victims by eliminating the third-party control requirement. A third-party control element in a trafficking law requires a commercially sexually exploited child to have a trafficker or controller to be recognized as a victim of trafficking. When state child sex trafficking laws only criminalize the conduct of a third party who provides, maintains, or facilitates the exchange of sex between the child victim and the buyer, children who are solicited and exploited by buyers do not fall under the protection of the child sex trafficking law. With this barrier now eliminated in Pennsylvania, any minor engaged in commercial sex now qualifies for a Safe Harbor response, as well as other protections afforded to trafficking victims.

Virginia also passed two bills that will support future Safe Harbor responses. House Bill 581, introduced by Del. Simmonds (D), requires the establishment of multidisciplinary human trafficking response teams. Collaborative, multidisciplinary groups (“MDTs”) addressing human trafficking have become essential in the national fight against human trafficking and the provision of necessary services and resources to survivors. This response model, which includes various disciplines working collaboratively, is encouraged by the U.S. Department of Justice and is recognized worldwide as a best practice in the anti-trafficking field. Through MDTs, law enforcement, child welfare, service providers, advocates, other professionals, as well as the child and their family can work collaboratively to prioritize the wellbeing of the survivor and provide trauma-informed support and services. The creation of these MDT’s will support future implementation of a Safe Harbor response.

Additionally, HB 268 introduced by Del. Watts (D), directs thejuvenile court to retain jurisdiction of a juvenile defendant if, during a transfer hearing, the court receives evidence that such juvenile was trafficked, sexually abused, or raped by alleged victim of the conduct for which they’ve been charged. Additionally, the bill states that the provisions shall be construed to prioritize the successful treatment and rehabilitation of juvenile victims of human trafficking and sex crimes who commit acts of violence against their abusers. While ideally, we would like to see these victims kept out of any punitive system and met with a protective—rather than punitive—response, Shared Hope supported this bill as a step toward more just responses to criminalized child trafficking survivors. The passage of this bill demonstrates an understanding that child victims who defend themselves against their abusers should be afforded the protections and rehabilitation that juvenile courtswere designed to provide.

Vacatur and Affirmative Defense Efforts

Vacatur and affirmative defense are crucial legal mechanisms designed to provide protection and justice to victims of trafficking. Vacatur refers to the legal process of nullifying convictions or judgments obtained against trafficking victims for offenses they committed as a direct result of being trafficked. It recognizes that individuals coerced or deceived into criminal activity should not be held accountable for actions taken under duress. Affirmative defense, on the other hand, allows trafficking victims to present evidence of their victimization to mitigate or excuse their criminal liability. These legal provisions acknowledge the complex dynamics of trafficking, where victims often endure manipulation, coercion, and exploitation, making it unjust to hold them fully responsible for their actions. By granting vacatur and affirmative defense, the legal system aims to empower victims, facilitate their recovery, and hold perpetrators accountable for their crimes. These mechanismsacknowledge the coercive circumstances that often compel victims to engage in criminal activities, offering them a legal recourse to escape punishment. Without such provisions, victims may face further victimization through the criminal justice system, exacerbating their trauma and hindering their ability to break free from the cycle of exploitation.

Pennsylvania’s legislature is currently considering a bill that would allow trafficking survivors to assert an affirmative defense for crimes directly related to their victimization. Importantly, this bill allows a survivor to assert the defense for any alleged offense. This is critical as we know that traffickers often force their victims to commit a variety of crimes for a variety of reasons. Traffickers may force a child victim to commit a crime knowing that the punishment for the child is likely to be lower if they are caught due to the child’s age or that, once a victim has committed a crime, they are less likely to seek help for fear of being punished for the afore mentioned crime(s). Additionally, victims may commit crimes to protect themselves in self-defense, to avoid abuse by their exploiter, or to escape or avoid their own sexual exploitation.

Arizona amended its vacatur statute to remove an arbitrary barrier to qualifying for the relief by passing HB 2623, introduced by Matt Gres (R). Previously, survivors could only petition for relief if the alleged conduct was committed before 2014. Now survivors can petition for vacatur regardless of when the conviction occurred. However, relief is very limited—only prostitution convictions may be vacated under this law, leaving many survivors with other convictions without legal recourse.

Omnibus Efforts

While our advocacy efforts predominantly focus on preventing unjust criminalization, there are a few states who are working on omnibus bills that impact several State Report Card policy goalsand are worth highlighting as broad efforts to shift the state-level response to child trafficking survivors.

Washington

Washington passed SB 6006, a bill that provides a number of critical supports and protections for victims of trafficking. First,this bill makes clear that trafficking victims have the ability to gain civil orders of protection from their traffickers. This is an essential resource for survivors because, in some circumstances, civil orders of protection (CPOs) can provide more comprehensive relief than the criminal justice system. Some survivors are able to petition for custody, child support, counseling, and eviction of the abuser within the context of a CPO.

Moreover, this legislation provides robust protection and support for minor victims of sex trafficking through multiple additions to how victims are cared for and supported during trial. Victim-witness testimony by sex trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation victims provided during a trial of their alleged exploiter can serve a key role in a successful conviction. However, the delivery of victim testimony can be a severely traumatic process for CSE minors regardless of their age at the time of testifying. SB 6006 allows for out-of-court statementsthat is otherwise inadmissible to be admitted as evidence to lighten to the burden that victims have in testifying. Further, victims would be able to testify via CCTV, which would decrease their re- traumatization of having to testify in front of their abusers.

Finally, SB 6006 provides for victim compensation without any time limitations and can file for these benefits at any time. SB 6006 also eliminates the statute of limitations for sex traffickingprosecutions.

Illinois

Illinois is currently considering a bill, SB 3697 introduced by Dale Fowler (R), that would improve the state’s response in a number of different ways. Critically, this bill improves victim identification, specifically for child welfare employees. It is imperative that child welfare is prepared to complement community-based service responses to provide specialized care, services, and, when appropriate, placement to children who enter the system on a report of child sex trafficking. Additionally, SB 3697 extends foster care related services to the age of 23. Youth who age out of foster care at the age of 18 often enter the world with little support. Research shows the lack of stability and opportunity during these pivotal years can damage the youth’s healthy development, positive long–term decision-making, and skill-building. This bill, if passed, will ensure continuity of support during a critical transitional period.

Finally, this bill requires the Illinois State Police to develop and deliver a course of instruction designed for departments, agencies, or associations that are likely to come in contact with human trafficking victims in the course of delivering services. Training agencies to identify human trafficking is crucial for several reasons. Firstly, it equips personnel with the knowledge and skills to recognize the signs and indicators of trafficking, allowing for timely intervention and assistance to victims. Secondly, it helps prevent misidentification of trafficking situations as other crimes or social issues, ensuring that victims receive appropriate support and services. Thirdly, training enhances collaboration and coordination among different agencies, enabling a more effective and comprehensive response to trafficking cases. Ultimately, such training empowers frontline responders to act as advocates for victims, disrupt trafficking networks, and contribute to the broader efforts to combat trafficking.

November 15, 2023 by stephen

Children in sex trafficking still unprotected by laws in most states, Shared Hope’s Report Cards on Child and Youth Sex Trafficking show

Nonprofit’s annual evaluation of all 50 states and Washington, D.C., shows progress in certain states’ legal protections and supports for victims, gives 32 states failing grades for laws addressing child and youth sex trafficking

WASHINGTON, NOVEMBER 15, 2023—Tennessee is the highest-performing state for laws to protect children and youth from sex trafficking and the first to achieve a grade of A in Shared Hope International’s Report Cards on Child and Youth Sex Trafficking, released today. As the only U.S. nonprofit organization working in every state to advance legislative protections for child and youth sex trafficking survivors, Shared Hope’s 2023 Report Cards for all 50 states and Washington, D.C., gave the majority of states – 32 – a grade of F, while Florida (B), Minnesota (C), California (C), and Washington (C) ranked in the top five of highest grade earners behind Tennessee.

The Report Cards are used to press for a national standard of victim-centered justice, which can be achieved only if all states are actively working to develop and implement robust protections and just responses to children and youth who have experienced trafficking. Through the Report Cards, Shared Hope is pushing states to ensure all minor victims of sex trafficking have access to protective care and services that help survivors heal and rebuild their lives.

“We applaud the progress that states have made in recent years, especially Tennessee in earning an A this year, according to our grading criteria,” said former U.S. Congresswoman and Shared Hope Founder and President Linda Smith. “At the same time, many states continue to struggle in their legislative efforts. This creates a wild patchwork of statutes across the country, with the number and quality of legal protections and responses literally all over the map. Regardless of state of residence, no minor should be punished for their own trafficking victimization. Instead, these minors deserve critical services and care.”

The Report Cards are the result of a comprehensive analysis and assessment of all legal responses to child and youth sex trafficking in each state. While Shared Hope recognizes a range of policy, practice, and cultural responses to sex trafficking victims in each state, the Report Cards evaluate only statutes and use 40 policy goals in six issue areas in its grading system. States are assigned up to 2.5 points for each policy goal for a possible total score of 100 (with a possibility of up to 10 extra credit points) and then assigned a letter grade – A, B, C, D, or F – based on their score.

The Report Cards are part of a larger toolkit that Shared Hope has produced for each state, which includes a State Analysis Report specific to each state’s statutes on child and youth sex trafficking. Shared Hope has produced the Report Cards and state analyses annually since 2011 as a tool to assist public policy activists and state elected officials in developing and advocating for better laws to support sex trafficking survivors.

In addition to the letter grades that Shared Hope has given to each state, the toolkit for each state this year includes the addition of a Safe Harbor Scorecard. This component was added to support and assist efforts as most states continue to develop robust Safe Harbor laws. Safe Harbor laws ensure victims of child and youth sex trafficking are not involved in the juvenile or criminal justice system but are instead directed toward restorative and protective services. Sustainable protections for vulnerable youth must start with laws that prohibit arresting, detaining, charging, and prosecuting all minors for prostitution offenses, while also requiring law enforcement to direct children and youth to specialized services and care. These laws are a subgroup of all statutes covered by the Report Cards and are at the core of Shared Hope’s policy goals. The organization has been working on safe harbor laws for the last 12 years out of its total 25 years of existence.

“As states make significant legislative reforms to move away from criminalizing survivors, access to appropriate services is critical to successful implementation of safe harbor laws,” said Christine Raino, Senior Director of Public Policy at Shared Hope. “This necessary and encouraging shift is demonstrated by this year’s top-scoring states, which have all appropriated substantial state funds towards specialized services for trafficked children and youth.”

The national average of numerical scores on the 40 policy goals is 57.9 for 2023. The average has risen from 51.2 in 2022 and 47.9 in 2021, the year that Shared Hope strengthened its grading criteria to shift the focus from criminal laws to victim-centered responses and services. Prior to that, Shared Hope had issued its annual Report Cards for ten years under a different evaluation framework emphasizing criminal law responses.

Send your state’s Report Card to your legislators

August 25, 2023 by Sidney McCoy

Unjust Criminalization: Zephi Trevino’s Story

Zephaniah “Zephi” Trevino has pleaded guilty and has been sentenced to 12 years for murder and five years for aggravated robbery. The Dallas County District Attorney alleged Zephi —along with two men— had taken part in a robbery that left one man dead from a gunshot wound and another injured. Although Zephi was not responsible for pulling the trigger, she was charged as an accomplice. What has been left out of the DA’s narrative, however, is that Zephi is a victim of sex trafficking. The two men who were “lured” by Zephi to the apartment where they were ultimately robbed, were there to purchase sex from 16-year-old Zephi. Zephi was charged as an adult and was facing a capital murder conviction. She took a plea deal, citing the risk of a life sentence was “too grave.”

While discouraging, this result is unsurprising as Texas has refused to see those who have been trafficked as victims, rather than criminals. Indeed, Texas remains one of the few¹ states that still criminalizes minors for prostitution—the very crime that is synonymous with their exploitation. In 2019, Governor Greg Abbot vetoed a bill that would protect minors from criminalization for prostitution and would instead direct them to receive assessment and services through child welfare and community-based services. That same year, after passing unanimously through the House and Senate, Governor Abbot vetoed a bill that would establish a clemency review panel for certain offenses committed by victims of domestic violence and human trafficking.

As it stands in Texas, a human trafficking survivor who has been unjustly charged with a crime has just one remedy: a “nondisclosure petition²,” a form of post-conviction relief that is limited to prostitution, marijuana, and certain theft offenses if the offense was committed “solely” as a trafficking victim.³ The relief is further limited because survivors are ineligible for the relief if they have additional convictions, and it requires survivors to provide assistance to law enforcement and prosecutors.⁴

Legal protections for victims of human trafficking are imperative given deeply pervasive forced criminality that exists in trafficking situations. In a 2016 survey, the National Survivor Network found that 90% of trafficking survivors reported being arrested and 60% reported being arrested for crimes other than prostitution or drug possession.⁵ Perhaps most significantly, the survey demonstrated that over half of all respondents believed that 100% of their criminal-legal involvement was directly related to their trafficking experience.⁶ These victim-offenders⁷ are retraumatized by their detention and prosecution. They are also left with a criminal record that hinders their ability to secure safe housing, employment, education, and other services. Contrary to the TVPA’s decree those trafficking victims not be criminalized as a result of their victimization,⁸ survivors continue to be charged with crimes related to their trafficking and states such as Texas fail to provide adequate legal protections to prevent criminalization.

What’s worse, the criminal-legal system itself can often mimic the power and control dynamics that exist in a trafficking situation. Justin Moore, one of Zephi’s defense attorneys, alluded to this in his comments to the press, stressing an “urgent need for a legal system that is trauma-informed . . . and that also calls into question the unchecked power that [prosecutors] have in this country and how they can bully defendants who are victims into taking plea deals.”⁹ This “bullying,” the pressure and coercion that is often applied on victims who are charged alongside their traffickers and co-conspirators, is a tactic used all too often. Indeed, the same youth who are charged as defendants alongside their trafficker may also be called to testify against their trafficker, and that testimony could be central to their successful prosecution.¹⁰ Although it does not appear that the Dallas District Attorney is pursuing trafficking charges against Zephi’s co-defendants, studies have shown that conditions of the juvenile/criminal justice process, secure confinement, and the stigma of criminal records alone further harm and traumatize child sex trafficking victims.¹¹ Prosecutors must weigh considerations of the harm to victim-offenders and the injustice of coercive charging tactics, and further, should be trained on victim-centered investigations and prosecutions to ensure positive identification of survivors and prevent unjust criminalization. Texas does not currently mandate such training.

Sex trafficking victimization and forced criminality are intrinsically linked. Arresting and prosecuting sex trafficking victims for criminal offenses, even violent ones, is in direct conflict with a victim-centered criminal justice approach and reflects a limited understanding of the complex nature of victim-offender intersectionality. Prohibiting the criminalization of sex trafficking victims for offenses related to victimization accounts for the nature and extent of control exerted by sex traffickers, and the influence of trauma on the decision-making process and behavior of survivors. Accordingly, states must enact non-criminalization laws, including an affirmative defense law, that don’t draw a “hard line” on the qualifying offenses and should extend to accomplice and co-conspirator liability.

Successful implementation of this change in law and practice will require training as well as active participation from criminal justice stakeholders, including law enforcement, victim advocates, prosecutors, and judges. To improve identification of sex trafficking victim-offenders, criminal justice stakeholders should take proactive steps throughout the criminal justice process to assess whether a person that is suspected of trafficking had also experienced trafficking victimization.

Finally, non-criminalization and post-conviction relief laws are two sides of the same coin. It is inevitable that survivors will “slip through the cracks” or go unidentified, resulting in unjust convictions. These survivors must be afforded an opportunity to vacate convictions they’ve received as a result of their victimization. States must not limit the types of crimes or charges for which a sex trafficking survivor can seek post-conviction relief to prostitution offenses. States limiting post-conviction relief to trafficking survivors who are convicted of prostitution or other sex offenses leave many sex trafficking survivors without any avenue for relief.

1 As of August 2023, twenty-nine (29) states plus Washington D.C. have passed laws preventing minors from being criminalized for prostitution-related offenses. Eighteen (18) states go on to expand non-criminalization laws to protect child sex trafficking survivors from being prosecuted for other crimes committed as a result of their victimization. Nine (9) states prohibit criminalization for, or provide an affirmative defense to, violent felonies. See Safe Harbor page.

2 See Texas Government Code § 411.0728. Juveniles in Texas are afforded additional opportunities to vacate delinquency adjudications under certain circumstances. However, this relief is not afforded to juveniles convicted of criminal offenses. See generally Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 58.253, Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 58.255, and Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 58.256.

3 Freedom Network USA Texas – Freedom Network USA

4 Id.

5 National Survivor Network Member Survey: Impact of Arrest and Detention on Survivors of Human Trafficking, August 2016. Microsoft Word – VacateSurveyFinal (nationalsurvivornetwork.org)

6 Id.

7 Victim-offender is used to refer to an individual who has experienced, or is currently experiencing, sex trafficking victimization and is alleged to have engaged in conduct that violates the law. See generally Shared Hope Int’l, Responding to Sex Trafficking: Victim-Offender Intersectionality (2020) https://sharedhope.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/SH_Responding-to-Sex-Trafficking-Victim-Offender-Intersectionality2020_FINAL.pdf.

8 22 U.S.C. § 7102(17) (2000) (“The term ‘victim of trafficking’ means a person subjected to an act or practice described in paragraph (9) or (10).”); Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-22, § 109, 129 Stat. 239 (“[S]ection 108 of this title amends section 1591 of title 18, United States Code, to add the words ‘solicits or patronizes’ to the sex trafficking statute making absolutely clear for judges, juries, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials that criminals who purchase sexual acts from human trafficking victims may be arrested, prosecuted, and convicted as sex trafficking offenders when this is merited by the facts of a particular case.”).

9 “Grand Prairie’s Zephi Trevino sentenced to 12 years in prison in fatal 2019 robbery” Jamie Landers and Kelli Smith Aug. 21 2023

10 Supra note 7.

11 Id.

November 1, 2022 by Christine Raino

Safe Harbor – What’s in a Name?

Lack of Consistency in Child Sex Trafficking Laws May Hurt Our Children

By Christine Raino and Eliza Reock

What’s in a name? A lot, actually. In the area of anti-sex trafficking law and policy, words and definitions matter. They have the ability to affect thousands of lives of individuals who have survived sex trafficking. In recent years, policy makers and anti-trafficking advocates around the nation have been celebrating the success and passage of “Safe Harbor” laws . . . the problem? No one knows what that means.

After over 20 years in the fight to combat sex trafficking and protect victims, Shared Hope recognizes the importance of language. For instance, we see the vast difference between the response to a child thought to be a victim of sexual exploitation and that same child if he or she is instead labeled a “child prostitute.” A simple change in terminology–from “child prostitute” to “child sex trafficking victim”–alters subconscious impression. Since the release of our 2009 National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking, Shared Hope has been working with law enforcement, service providers and policy makers to imprint this understanding and assure that adults working with trafficked children recognize them as victims and not perpetrators of a crime. Yet, 23 states still have laws that allow children to be charged with prostitution and other crimes related to their trafficking abuse, effectively criminalizing them for the same conduct that makes them a victim of a crime. Laws matter. This conflict in the law is confusing and complicates our response.

Does this 23 state statistic surprise you? Well, you may be surprised because many states claim to have fixed the problem by enacting a “safe harbor” law. But what does it really mean to pass a “safe harbor” law? Unfortunately, this term has no single, clear meaning. Current “safe harbor” laws range all the way from an affirmative defense with no clear path to services, to comprehensive laws that respond to sex trafficked kids through various points of contact and mandate access to specialized services. As a result, the term “safe harbor” has become a catch-all phrase for any attempt to reduce criminalization of minors for prostitution—some of these laws are progressive and comprehensive and others fall far short of what is needed to truly protect child victims.

The term originates from the very first law enacted to protect juvenile sex trafficking victims from criminalization, the New York Safe Harbor law, enacted in 2008. This law allows minors to be charged with prostitution and directed into an adversarial court process in order to access services, and was definitely not the original goal of the bill. When survivor advocates set out to establish this new protection for sex trafficked youth and Assembly Bill 5258 was introduced, it would have eliminated criminal liability for minors for prostitution. Non-criminalization was the goal of the bill, and even though that’s not where the bill ended in 2008, that should still be the goal – for every state. Unfortunately, this incomplete response became the jumping off point for other states’ attempts at protecting minors from criminal liability, many of which continued to use the “safe harbor” terminology.

One of the risks of continuing to utilize an ill-defined term, and giving states credit for “safe harbor” laws without closely examining the structure of those laws, is complacency–the sense that the issue has been addressed–yet there is not one single state that has worked out a highly effective response to juvenile sex trafficking. Nevertheless, the lack of a perfect model is not a reason to stop moving forward and it is exciting to see states taking initiative in the law to address the unfair penalization of juvenile sex trafficking victims.

This is not a simple process and it requires a long term commitment as well as the willingness to keep assessing, evaluating and improving the laws necessary to protect juvenile sex trafficking victims. It is critical to maintain two clear goals at the core of the effort to draft truly effective child protective responses: (1) comprehensive laws that eliminate criminal liability for minors for prostitution and other nonviolent offenses related to their victimization, and (2) provision of an avenue to specialized services for trafficked youth.

Shared Hope has created useful tools that help educate advocates to understand their state laws meant to protect children who have been trafficked. Even if your state has a “safe harbor” law, examine the law to see if it meets the above named goals and if not, let your officials know that a bill name is not a victory. Join us in demanding that all states have legislative frameworks that undeniably and unequivocally provide justice for all child sex trafficking victims

Related Research:

Trauma, Coercion, and the Tools of Trafficking Exploitation: Examining the Consequences for Children and Youth in the Justice System

Seeking Justice Report

JuST Response Council Protective Response Model Field Guidance

Justice for Juveniles Field Guidance

Non-Crimiminalization of Juvenile Sex Trafficking Victims Policy Paper

State Mapping Report

Learn More About Safe Harbor

September 20, 2022 by Guest

“My story can change things.” – Pieper Lewis, September 13, 2022

In sentencing child sex trafficking survivor, Pieper Lewis, on September 13, 2022, Judge David Porter stated, “Ms. Lewis, this is the second chance you asked for. You don’t get a third. Do you understand?”

The judge was alluding to his sentencing order that imposed a term of probation in lieu of immediate imprisonment, however the “second chance” he believed he was providing is nevertheless one rooted in punitive responses for trafficking survivors. If the anti-trafficking movement is committed to moving toward truly trauma-informed approaches, “second chances” must not include criminalizing survivors for trauma and offenses committed as a result of trafficking victimization; “second chances” must not include tools of control and punishment that resemble a survivor’s past exploitation, including incessant supervision, adherence to strict rules, placement in locked facilities, and debts to earn freedom.

Yet, in providing a “second chance” to Pieper, Judge Porter ordered Pieper to pay her exploiter’s family $150,000 in restitution,[1] the court an additional $4,000 for expenses incurred in her prosecution,[2] and, for the next five years, to wear an ankle monitor, remain on probation, and live in a facility managed by the Iowa Department of Corrections. Further, if Pieper violates any term of her probation, the court is authorized to reimpose a 20-year term of imprisonment.

Trafficking another person, raping them, exposing them to abuse after abuse is horrendous. While a person being trafficked is still breathing, and therefore technically alive, their life is no longer their own. Victims of human trafficking are subjected to a level of control that enslaves them fully, mind and body. They are subjected to abuses, assaults, and a commodification that reduces them to a product and shreds the soul.

Prosecutors argued that Brooks was asleep at the time he was stabbed and therefore not an immediate danger to Lewis. Such assertions can only be made by someone entirely disconnected from the intensity of trauma and human trafficking. Brooks had drugged and raped Pieper repeatedly, on more than one occasion, contributing to a pattern of sexual violence inflicted on her, as well as other harm, including homelessness and poverty.

Pieper Lewis, a 15-year-old child at the time of her arrest, has not been treated as such, nor has she been treated as the victim she was and, as she rightfully claimed in court, the survivor she is. Indeed, Pieper powerfully demonstrated her resilience during her sentencing hearing, “Today, my voice will be heard. The story of Pieper Lewis holds power. The trauma of Pieper Lewis carries a ruptured beginning, tormented past and a delayed future. With perseverance, we have the ability to change the direction of our delayed and unknown futures.” But she also spoke to how the criminal justice system had overlooked and ignored her victimization as she was prosecuted for a crime that directly arose from the abuse and trauma she experienced through trafficking, “I wish the events that took place on June 1, 2020 never occurred, but to say there’s only one victim to this story is absurd.”

Even when imprisonment is avoided, criminal and juvenile justice responses are inherently punitive and often compound trauma, contribute to cycles of poverty and exploitation, and fail to positively contribute to the survivors’ healing. They also cement cultural beliefs and practices that blame victims for their own harm suffered. This is the reason more comprehensive approaches to preventing survivors from being criminalized are at the core of survivor-centered reforms.

As a judge in a state that continues to allow children to be charged with prostitution–conduct that is synonymous with their trafficking victimization–Judge Porter’s ruling cemented the victim-blaming beliefs that have undermined efforts to protect rather than punish child sex trafficking victims in Iowa.

Iowa currently joins 23 states that still criminalize children for prostitution, 34 states that still allow children to be charged and prosecuted for other non-violent crimes or trafficking charges that resulted from their trafficking victimization, and 42 states that still do not allow child sex trafficking victims, like Pieper Lewis, to assert a defense to violent felony charges that arose from trafficking victimization. We as a country have a long way to go to recognize, in our laws and within our judicial system, the harm that is caused by continuing to treat victims of trafficking as criminals while ignoring the impact of their victimization.

Together, The Genesis Project, Shared Hope International, and the Iowa Network Against Human Trafficking and Slavery seek just responses for trafficking survivors, including Pieper. We strongly urge dramatic change in how survivors of trafficking are treated in Iowa and beyond. We invite you to join us and help shift the status quo to one that protects survivors rather than blaming and punishing them for their own victimization.

Footnotes:

[1] https://www.gofundme.com/f/vxgt7q

[2] The prosecution of Pieper Lewis was inherently unjust as the lack of legal protections (e.g., an affirmative defense, non-criminalization protection) available to human trafficking victims under Iowa state law and, thus, unavailable to Pieper, left her with no legal remedies. As a result, despite her status as a child sex trafficking victim, she was arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced for an offense that arose from her trafficking victimization. In response to the injustice of Pieper being prosecuted and sentenced in the death of her abuser, without access to legal protections, advocates and supporters of Pieper have raised over $550,000 (as of September 19, 2022) to pay her restitution order and court fees and provide additional funds to positively impact Pieper’s trajectory. To learn more about best practice for responding to sex trafficking victims engaged in criminal or delinquent conduct, please visit: https://reportcards.sharedhope.org/safeharbor/.