►
From YouTube: Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary (2-16-23)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
Here
looks
like
we've
got
a
quorum
all
right,
seeing
that
we
have
a
quorum,
we're
authorized
to
do
business,
we'll
jump
right
in
here
we're
going
to
go
a
little
bit
out
of
order
to
accommodate
some
editing.
We
need
to
do
on
one
of
the
bills.
I
believe
you
all
correct
me
Roberta.
If
you're
in
the
room
was
the
sub
distributed
the
wrong
sub
or
just
one
that
didn't
go
statue
through
it,
so
it
wasn't
sent
at
all.
Okay,
so
we're
going
to
have
a
committee
sub
on
Senate
Bill
9.
A
That
makes
some
I
think
some
modest
changes,
but
we'd
like
to
do
that
this
morning,
they're
working
that
running
that
through
statute
revision
right
now
and
it
was
not
sent
and
distributed
in
error.
So
apologies
for
that.
So
we're
going
to
skip
over
Senate
bill
nine
for
the
moment
and
go
right
in
if
you're,
ready,
Senator
wheeler,
we
can
take
up
Senate
bill
40.
A
That's
right,
members
you'll!
This
is
familiar
territory.
Having
heard
this
bill
last
year,
glad
to
have
Senator
wheeler
back
to
present
it
again
all.
C
Right,
thank
you.
Mr
chairman
Senate,
Bill
40
is
a
bill,
as
the
chairman
says.
It's
familiar
to
you.
I
brought
this
last
year
and
I
last
year.
I
did
have
the
parents
of
Micah
Chantel
Fletcher
last
year
and
and
one
of
the
officers
of
my
town,
but
what
it
essentially
does
Micah
was
a
young
girl.
18
years
old,
she
was
looking
to
attend
a
upike
in
Pikeville
Kentucky
had
gone
for
a
campus
visit,
and
you
know
her
parents
get
a
call
every
parent's
worst
nightmare.
C
Her
their
daughter
is
found
dead
at
the
bottom
of
the
stairway,
no
apparent
cause
of
death
whatsoever
ever
no
marks
on
her
body.
People
said
it.
This
looks
like
she
laid
down
and
went
to
sleep
as,
of
course,
we,
a
good
officer,
would
do
one
of
our
detectives
open
to
criminal
investigation
to
see
what
the
cause
of
death
was
and
also
the
body
was
sent
to
the
State
medical
examiner.
They
did
performed
an
autopsy
and
the
the
cause
of
death
came
back
as
undetermined.
C
Well,
Micah's
Mother
wasn't
was
determined
to
find
out
what
caused
her
daughter's
death.
She
continued
to
pursue
Avenues
to
find
out
what
happened
to
her
daughter,
She
Came
Upon,
a
geneticist
at
the
University
of
Virginia,
that
recommended
a
genetic
testing
of
her
daughter's
blood
for
abnormalities.
They
weren't
able
to
obtain
fluids
from
the
Department
of
the
State
medical
examiner.
They
were
sent
off
and
it
was
determined
that
Mike
had
a
very
and
a
heart,
A
congenital
heart
abnormality
that
caused
her
to
go
into
atrial,
fibrillation
and,
and
she
died.
C
This
condition
was
something
that
could
have
been
controlled
by
a
simple
beta
blocker.
Had
she
known
the
importance
of
that
was
that
all
the
other
family
members
were
able
to
go
and
get
tested
for
this
genetic
abnormality
and
determine
whether
or
not
they
also
suffered
the
potential
for
you
know
to
Simply,
suddenly
drop
dead
or
and
suffer
the
same
fate
as
I
said
last
year.
This
bill
is
really
more
about
life
than
it
is
about
death.
C
What
it
requires
is
that
young
people
in
a
particular
category,
if
they
State
medical,
examiner,
performs
an
autopsy
and
the
cause
of
death.
Come
back
comes
back
undetermined.
They
will
send
out
for
genetic
testing
for
cardiac
abnormalities.
The
initial
bill
last
year
was
a
little
bit
broader.
We
narrowed
it
down.
Just
for
the
sake
of
some
costs.
The
State
medical
examiner
in
the
corners
I've
met
both
with
them
and
worked
with
them
to
come
out.
Come
up
with
the
substitutes
you
see
here
today
and
they're
on
board
with
it
again.
C
This
this
I
think
not
only
serves
the
way
to
give
families
closure.
It
also
allows
people
the
the
ones
that
are
left
behind
to
to
to
discover
any
potential.
C
A
E
A
And
a
second
from
Senator
schickel
and
second
from
Senator
Turner
any
further
questions,
questions
of
the
sponsor,
seeing
none
Madam
Secretary,
please
call
the
roll.
G
A
Aye
bill
passes
with
favorable
expression.
Thank
you
senator
for
bringing
it
back
all
right,
Senator
Carol!
Are
you
ready,
while
you're
coming
up
to
the
to
the
witness
stand
there
I
want
to
have
everybody
Welcome
the
folks
from
the
leadership
Hopkinsville
class,
which
is
here
if
you're
here
raise
your
hand,
so
everybody
like
five
people
over
here
that
aren't
from
leadership
Hopkinsville
class.
A
Thank
you
glad
to
have
you
all
here
appreciate
you
all
making
the
trip
up.
Hope
you
enjoy
your
time
up
here
today,
look
forward
to
speaking
after
the
meeting,
but
I'm
glad
you
all
can
make
it
as
a
leadership
Hopkinsville
graduate
in
the
class
that
actually
built
project
playground,
I'm,
pretty
proud
of
that.
But
I'm
glad
to
have
you
all
here
and
I
know:
you're
gonna
enjoy
a
lot
of
what
you
see
and
learn.
A
A
H
I
H
I'll
learn
one
of
these
days.
Mr
chairman
I,
appreciate
the
Committee
hearing
this
bill
today
and
Senate
Bill
80
has
broken
up
into
two
different
sections,
and
both
of
them
were
very
brief.
I'll
cover
section
one
and
then
bring
forth
the
amendment
and
then
cover
section
two
section:
one
has
to
do
with
those
who
are
on
the
sex
offender
registry
and
within
this
bill
it
adds
laundering
within
one
thousand
feet
of
the
clearly
defined
grounds
of
a
high
school
middle
school.
H
Elementary
school
preschool,
publicly
owned
or
leased
playground
licensed
day
care
facility,
and
it
adds
language
publicly
owned
or
leased
swimming
pool
or
Splash
Pad,
as
defined
in
krs-211.205
and,
and
that
is
prohibited.
Unless
there
is
permission
from
the
appropriate
body.
We
had
some
issues
come
up
yesterday
that
led
us
to
more
clearly
Define
what
loitering
means.
H
H
We've
had
problems
in
a
community
with
a
registered
sex
offender
who
operates
a
food
truck,
pulling
right
up
to
the
property
of
a
particular
Park
and
basically
taunting
police
officers
that
that
he
has
a
right
to
be
there
and
it
has
made
parents
many
very
uncomfortable,
and
it
was
the
the
county
attorney
in
this
particular
County.
That
notified
me
about
this.
H
As
a
result,
I
have
a
senate
committee
amendment
that
it
deletes
or
loitering
within
one
thousand
feet
and
it
inserts
in
lieu
of
lautering
within
one
thousand
feet
of
or
working
as
the
sole
proprietor
or
occupant
of
any
mobile
business
operating
within
one
thousand
feet,
and
we
have
defined
mobile
business
means
any
business
that
operates
from
a
motor
vehicle
or
willed
cart
that
can
be
operated,
pushed
or
pulled
on
a
sidewalk,
Street
or
Highway,
where
food
goods
or
services
are
prepared,
processed
or
sold
or
dispensed
to
the
public.
D
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
Center
I'd
have
just
one
question.
I
think
you
may
have
already
clarified
this,
but
yesterday
there
was
a
an
email
that
was
sent
from
kacdl
regarding
some
concerns
and
I
believe
that
that's
what
you've
addressed
in
the
committee
sub,
subsection
2
B2,
is
that
correct
that.
H
Is
correct:
we
look
at
the
at
the
current
definition
of
watering
and
in
the
way
that
was
worded
really
didn't
address
this
circumstance.
So
so
we
adjusted
that
definition
to
an
extent,
but
it
will
allow
for
those
that
are
seeking
services
or
going
into
a
courthouse
or
doing
normal
Daily
Business
that
they
would
not.
They
would
not
fall
under
this
if
it
is
a
legitimate,
there's,
a
legitimate
reason
for
them
to
be
there.
So
we
hope
this
addresses
those
concerns.
Thank
you.
A
And
I
I
believe
that
email
went
to
all
members,
so
everybody
should
have
gotten
that
and
I've
also
got
I
know
you
want
to
finish
your
remarks.
Mr
ecklund's
here
to
speak
on
behalf
of
his
group
and
he
also
sent
a
letter
to
all
members
but
I.
Let
him
speak
in
just
a
moment,
go
ahead
and
finish
your
remarks.
If
you'd
like
yeah.
H
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
and
section
two
of
the
bill
is
a
different
topic
and
it
is
related
to
medical
professionals,
Within
a
health
care
facility.
We
discovered
and
again
I
was
contacted
by
some
law
enforcement
officers
in
prior
to
2019
those
medical
professionals.
Nurses,
working
within
an
emergency
room
were
covered
under
assault
third
degree
and
in
2019
there
was
a
bill
that
was
passed.
It
was
house
house
bill
106.
H
That
passed
that
year
and
as
a
result
of
that
and
this
Bill
had
to
do
with
Emergency
Medical
Services,
there
were
definitions
that
were
were
changed
in
relation
to
the
various
types
of
emergency
providers
and
it
was
under
legislation
or
under
regulations
that
were
in
effect
in
2018.
It
defined
an
emergency
medical
services
personnel
as
certified
or
licensed
and
trained
to
provide
Emergency
Medical
Services.
It
authorized
Emergency,
Medical
Services
medical
director,
whether
paid
or
volunteer
basis.
So
under
the
statute,
nurses
and
and
those
working
within
an
emergency
room
were
covered
under
this.
H
H
We
have
added
that
a
health
care
provider
as
defined
in
KRS
311-821
if
the
event
occurs,
while
a
health
care
provider
is
providing
medical
Medical
Care
within
an
emergency
room
of
a
hospital,
so
any
health
care
provider
under
that
definition.
That
is
providing
care
within
an
emergency
room
will
be
protected
under
the
assault.
Third
degree
statute,
we're
basically
we're
not
going
any
further
than
we
were
before
we're
restoring
those
protections.
A
A
F
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
and
I
appreciate
what
you're
doing
as
I
understand
the
straight
line,
and
this
is
only
applicable,
so
the
everybody
will
know
it's.
The
sex
offender
registered
sex
offenders.
That's
correct!.
H
F
H
A
Let
him
speak
I
know
he
sent
materials
to
the
members
and
it's
in
your
folders,
but
he
wanted
to
speak.
I
wanted
to
let
him
come
up.
I
We've
just
adopted
no
I
haven't
right,
so
so
my
name
is
George
Eckland
I
work
as
the
advocacy
director
for
the
college
from
the
homeless,
so
we're
a
40-member
agency
in
Louisville
Kentucky
with
the
goal
of
getting
people
into
housing.
I
You
know
we
believe
that
everybody
deserves
and
needs
housing
not
just
for
themselves,
but
also
for
the
community,
the
good
of
the
community,
when
people
have
that
stable
housing,
they're
able
to
seek
treatment,
they're
able
to
seek
employment,
they're
able
to
go
to
therapy
therapy
appointments,
they're
able
to
really
become
an
asset
to
the
community,
rather
than
a
liability
for
us.
When
somebody
who
is
required
to
be
on
the
registry
exits
incarceration,
they're
two
times
more
likely
to
end
up
homeless
because
of
housing
restrictions,
we
have
a.
I
You
know
it
equates
to
about
88
square
miles
and
that's
almost
the
size
of
Robertson
County,
which
is
our
smallest
county
in
Kentucky.
You
know.
For
us,
we
see
housing
as
part
of
the
way
to
promote
Public
Safety.
When
people
are
housed,
we
know
where
they
are.
We
are
able
to
get
services
to
them,
we're
able
to
work
with
case
managers
to
make
sure
that
they're
being
held
accountable
in
some
shape
or
form.
I
Our
fear
is
that
this
bill's,
like
this
and
I,
appreciate
Senator
Carroll's,
like
efforts
to
like
get
a
definition.
I
look
forward
to
looking
at
it
and
kind
of
reviewing
it,
but
our
our
fear
is
that
this
will
just
perpetuate
and
make
our
jobs
harder.
I
would
love
to
like
assess
to
see
how
can
one?
I
How
can
we
reduce
that
thousand
foot
barrier
to
make
it
a
accommodate,
like
the
urban
landscape
that
we're
dealing
with
in
Louisville
and
then
I
would
also
like
to
have
a
conversation
during
the
interim
of
like
how
can
we
increase
in
compliance
for
people
that
are
on
the
registry
who
are
homeless,
because,
right
now
there
is
not
a
clear
way
for
them
to
like
stay
in
compliance.
So
I
ask
that
you
know
you
table
this.
This
legislation
for
this
session
and
like
continue
this
conversation
during
the
interim,
and
thank
you
for
your
time.
A
Thank
you,
George
I,
appreciate
that
we
got
a
motion
on
the
bill.
Do
you
have
anything
else
Senator
you
wanted
to
add.
H
A
It's
a
good
thing:
you
cleared
that
up
all
right
got
a
motion
on
the
bill,
as
amended
by
the
sub
and
the
amendment
in
a
second
from
Senator
Turner.
Thank
you.
The
motion
from
Senator
wheeler
any
further
question.
A
K
Explain
my
vote.
Thank
you,
sir.
First
of
all,
sir
I
really
really
want
to
thank
you
for
your
intentions
behind
this
bill
and
particularly
for
including
Health
Care
Providers,
and
trying
to
offer
them
some
some
needed
protection,
because
this
is
happening
now
and
unfortunately
not
just
in
emergency
rooms.
I
mean
I
know
this
will
cover
ers.
K
It
will
not
cover,
like
my
sister,
who
got
attacked
by
a
patient
at
work
on
the
floor,
but
I
really
really
appreciate
those
sentiments
and
I
also
honestly
appreciate
that
we're
trying
to
keep
sexual
predators
away
from
our
children,
particularly
at
places
like
pools
and
splash
guards
where
my
child
spent
most
of
his
life
growing
up.
K
K
I'm
going
to
vote
Yes,
but
I
am
going
to
say
that
I
have
serious
reservations
about
the
perimeter
and
I
have
serious
reservations
about
who
we
identify
as
a
loiter,
because
I
can
promise
you
if
I'm
sitting
out
there
minding
my
own
business,
nobody's
going
to
come
up
and
ask
me
to
leave,
but
there
are
many,
many
other
people
that
they
will
so
I
vote,
Yes
with
some
gratitude
and
some
reservations.
Thank
you,
sir.
L
F
Can
I
explain
my
vote?
Mr
chairman?
Yes,
sir,
you
can
thank
you.
Mr
chairman
I
believe
that
the
thousand
foot
does
would
not
apply
to
somebody
that
lives
in
a
residence.
It
says
loitering
and
they
can
do
what
they
want
to
around
their
residence.
As
a
lawyer,
I
don't
see
how
it
would
be
applicable
that
anybody
could
be
charged
with
loitering
when
it's
your
house,
your
outside
playground,
your
outside
streets,
your
own,
that's
not
loitering,
that's
where
you
live
so
I'm
I'm
voting!
Yes,
for
this
bill.
A
A
H
K
K
A
You
Senator
nice
job,
while
we're
waiting,
I
I
want
to
for
all
the
leadership
folks
to
explain
everything
that
just
happened.
We
have
you
got
a
little
exercise
in
the
committee
amendment
process,
which
we
rarely
do.
We
do
committee
substitutes,
which
is
also
a
way
to
amend
a
bill
in
the
committee
and
I,
won't
I
won't
get
into
the
details
because
that'd
bore
everybody,
but
but
you've
just
seen
exactly
what
the
legislative
process
is
intended
to
do.
A
A
sponsor
files,
a
bill
that
came
from
a
constituent
basis
and
a
need
from
his
district
I,
worked
on
the
bill
filed
IT
issues
were
raised
that
were
legitimate
and
changes
were
made
and
those
changes
were
adopted
just
now
through
the
both
the
committee
substitute
and
a
committee
Amendment,
but
both
of
those
are
ways
to
amend
the
original
Bill
while
it's
still
in
committee.
A
A
All
right,
yeah,
yeah
I'm
not
going
to
comment
on
that.
Are
we
ready
on
Senate
bill
nine?
A
J
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
I'll,
just
explain
real
quick,
the
sub
that's
coming
being
handed
out
are
some
minor
changes
that
Senator
West,
the
chairman,
Westfield
and
myself
worked
on
and
had
some
input
and
there's
just
a
minor
glitch.
We
didn't
get
it
out
in
time,
so
I
appreciate
it
disaster
averted.
It
is
a
disaster
averted
for
sure.
A
Got
a
motion:
is
there
a
second
thank
you
from
Senator
schickel
and
Senator
wheeler,
all
those
in
favor
of
adopting
this
up.
Please
vote
for
saying:
aye
aye.
Those
opposed
the
sub
is
before
a
senator,
perfect.
J
Well,
the
day
before
you
is
Tracy
and
Kirk
Hazelwood
and
representative
Jonathan
Dixon,
we
are
Henderson.
We
are
lofton's
law
and
have
been
involved
in
advocating
for
change
in
this
particular
law
for
the
last
year
or
so
I'm
going
to
yield
for
a
few
minutes
here
to
allow
Tracy
to
tell
Austin's
story
in
a
summary
form
and
to
say
a
few
comments
and
then
I'll
have
a
few
comments.
After
her.
M
Back
in
October,
but
for
you
guys
that
didn't
I'll
just
give
a
short
story
here.
My
son
Lofton
Hazelwood
left
for
the
University
of
Kentucky
in
August
of
21.
and
he
pledged
a
fraternity
and
he
got
a
bid
for
the
farmhouse
in
Lexington.
He
was
thrilled
to
death.
I
mean
it
was
just
a
bunch
of
good
old
boys
and
all
this
so
after
he
got
his
pledge
card
everything
kind
of
changed.
M
There
were
different
things
they
had
to
do
that.
They
didn't
necessarily
want
to
do
some
things
that
were
illegal
could
have
kicked
him
out
of
school.
You
know
things
that
we
didn't
find
out
until
afterwards,
but
on
the
night
that
Lofton
passed
away,
they
were
supposed
to
go
serenading
that
night
and
they
were
told
that
it
was
a
tradition
to
drink
Wild,
Turkey
101.,
my
son,
's
blood
alcohol
was
.354.
M
It
was
like
almost
an
hour
later,
a
young
man
came
into
the
house
and
found
him,
and
it
was
just
too
late.
It
was
just
too
late,
but
they
said
that
it
was
tradition
that
they
were
to
drink
this
wild
turkey.
Now
what
this
law,
what
Senate
Bill
9
is
all
about
is
about.
Hazing
hazing
is
a
is
a
specific
form
of
abuse
that
is
not
adequately
adequately
covered
in
the
state
of
Kentucky.
Everything
is
left
up
to
the
universities.
M
We
have
had
so
much
support
in
our
area
and
I
want
everybody
to
know
how
much
and
how
much
I
have
appreciated
the
people
that
are
behind
us.
We've
talked
to
people
all
over
the
country
that
have
gone
through
the
same
things.
There
are
only
13
states
that
actually
have
a
law.
I
have
a
stock
and
I
know
you
guys
got
all
these
I
have
a
stack
of
emails
from
the
Junior
High
kids
at
his
in
our
hometown.
L
J
Mr
chairman,
currently
Kentucky
law
places
the
burden
on
universities
and
colleges
to
enforce
the
act
of
hazing,
with
the
maximum
penalty
of
expulsion
of
the
student
symbol9
seeks
to
add
Kentucky
to
a
list
of
13
other
states,
as
Tracy
said
that
will
Elevate
this
act
of
hazing
to
criminal
status.
For
far
too
long,
hazing
has
been
this
awkward
rite
of
passage
in
Kentucky
and
other
states.
That
many
still
refuse
to
acknowledge
is
wrong.
We
believe
that
elevating
the
elevation
of
hazing
to
a
crime
addresses
head-on
the
seriousness
of
these
actions.
J
J
We
do
not
believe
that
the
warrant
wanting
endangerment
charge
in
Kentucky
adequately
covers
all
the
acts
of
hazing,
and
this
is
why
it
merits
a
separate
criminal
status
under
Senate
Bill
9,
a
person
is
guilty
of
hazing
in
the
first
degree
when
he
or
she
intentionally
or
wantingly,
engages
in
the
act
of
hazing
that
results
in
the
serious
physical
injury
or
death
of
a
student
under
this
proposed
legislation.
J
First
degree
hazing
will
be
a
Class
D
Felony
under
Senate
Bill
9,
a
person
is
guilty
of
hazing
in
the
second
degree
when
he
or
she
recklessly
engages
in
the
act
of
hazing
and
under
this
legislation.
Second
degree
hazing
will
be
a
Class
A
misdemeanor
and
finally,
in
section
one
of
the
bill
it
thoroughly
describes
what
hazing
is
gives
a
good
definition.
So
there's
not
any
confusion
and,
as
Tracy
said,
and
as
you've
seen
in
your
inbox,
your
email
inbox
there's
support
all
across
the
state
even
outside
of
Northwest
Kentucky.
J
There's
support
for
this
legislation.
We're
hopeful
that
that
future
Kentucky
students
will
not
have
to
endure
the
needless
hazing
to
join
an
organization,
and
we
truly
believe
that
this
law
will
save
lives
of
future
Kentucky
students,
so
that
Mr,
chairman
I'd,
be
open
to
comments
or
questions
I'll
be
happy
to
explain
the
small
changes
that
we
made
in
the
sub.
If
you'd
like
for
me
to.
G
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
and
first
I
want
to
give
my
condolences
to
your
family
in
this
horrible
tragedy
and
our
hearts
go
out
to
you.
G
G
G
Is
there?
Is
there
any
additional
law?
Besides
the
laws
that
you
know,
we
already
have
on
the
books.
J
L
G
Question
it
it
does
and
it
doesn't
I
think
it's
a
matter
of
what
a
prosecutor
and
how
Vigilant
a
prosecutor
wants
to
be
and
right,
I.
Remember
the
Senate
President
always
used
to
say
a
lazy
prosecutor
bill.
You
know
the
prosecutor
in
the
community
has
to
sort
this
thing
out
and
go
through
it
and
and
find
because
from
what
everything
I
could
see
in
this,
the
the
the
the
offenses
were
in
there.
The
crimes
were
in
there
in
current.
J
Law
and
I
think
the
other
part
of
this
is
truthfully
elevating
this
this
occurrence,
this
action
to
keep
it
from
happening
again.
I
think
it's
at
a
point.
If
you
talk
to
college
students
around,
you
know,
there's
a
recent
article
that
was
written
by
the
lantern
that
actually
showed
how
tough
it
is
to
get
a
comment
on
this.
J
But
when
people
actually
comment
on
it,
the
students
say
there
needs
to
be
a
stick
behind
hazing
to
make
it
to
where
you
can
stand
up
in
the
training
that
some
of
these
organizations
go
through
and
just
say,
look
we're
serious
Kentucky
serious
about
this,
have
fun,
but
don't
Haze
and
I
think
that's
the
intent
of
this
law.
I.
A
A
Can't
in
just
in
just
a
moment,
I
also
want
to
highlight
something
in
your
bill,
which
I
think
might
address.
That
there's
also
been
concerns
anytime.
We
create
a
new
criminal
offense
people
are
concerned
about
there
being
another
crime
that
people
can
can
have
on
their
record
at
some
point,
but
the
bill
actually
cleverly
addresses
that
with
wanting
endangerment
allowing
the
times
to
run
concurrently
with
one
another.
So.
J
A
F
But
I
think
section
two
clearly
clarifies
the
question:
a
person
is
guilty
of
hazing
and
the
first
degree
when
he
or
she
intentionally
won't
engages
in
the
act
that
results
in
serious
physical
injury.
You
can't
say
that
well,
I
encouraged
him
to,
but
I
didn't
do
it,
and
if
a
person
is
18
years
or
older,
you
can
as
a
adult,
maybe
it's
the
same
age
or
older
in
one
of
those
units
just
keep
convincing
them
that
they
need
to
drink.
F
This
prohibits
that
yeah,
because
the
engagement
engagement
that
conduct
will
get
you
found
guilty
of
a
Class
D
Felony,
which
is
one
to
five
years
in
the
penitentiary.
That's
right
now,
if
you're,
just
encouraging
down
in
the
second
provision,
you're
guilty
of
hazing
the
SEC
degree
when
you
recklessly
engage
in
that.
So
it's
very
clear
here.
The
prosecutor
won't
have
no
choice.
That's
right!
If
somebody's
injured
they're
going
to
get
charged
with
that
offense
one
of
the
two
of
them.
It's
just
the
degree
that
they
play
in
the
encouragement
or
actual
participation
of
it.
J
J
Turner
we
that
was
one
of
the
changes
in
the
sub
is
that
we
changed
from
participation
to
engage.
B
K
I
want
to
look
you
both
as
best
I
can
in
the
eye
and
say
thank
you
for
your
courage
in
being
here.
I
have
recently
learned
how
hard
it
is
to
speak
for
a
dead
child
and
how
much
of
you
it
takes
to
come
up
here
and
do
this
and
I
applaud.
I
applaud
your
willingness
to
do
this
and
I.
Thank
you
for
your
efforts
to
protect
other
children.
K
N
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
I'd,
like
to
start
off
by
again
reiterating
what
many
have
said
up
here.
We
are
sorry
for
your
loss.
As
a
former
educator
retired
educator,
this
hits
home
for
me
as
we're
entrusted
with
the
most
valuable
assets
that
we
have
in
Kentucky
as
Educators.
Our
parents
give
us
their
children
for
most
of
the
day
and
as
they
go
into
University
for
a
period
of
four
years
and
sometimes
longer
it
is
our
responsibility
to
do
all.
N
We
can
to
instill
that
trust
and
awareness,
the
value
that
they
are
putting
in
our
hands
as
educators.
N
Grateful
for
your
efforts
senator
for
this
bill.
This
goes
to
the
very
heart
of
what
I'm,
speaking
of
that
is
the
entrustment
of
one's
children.
So
thank
you
for
the
bill.
It
has
my
full
support.
D
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
Senator
I
want
to
ask
you
about
section
two
and
three,
and
in
section
three
it
talks
about
defenses
that
are
enumerated.
There
I
think
it's
a
subsection.
What
section
three
subsection
three!
You
see
that
on
page
two,
yes,
so
those
defenses
are
enumerated
in
the
statute
for
reckless
conduct,
but
there
are
no
defenses
listed
in
section
two
and
I
just
wanted
to
see.
If
you
could
explain
if
there
was
a
thought
process
about
that
or
if
that
was
an
oversight,
if
that
was
intentional,.
D
About
wanting
conduct
versus
Reckless
conduct,
but
would
you
be
willing
to
talk
with
me
about
that
absolutely.
J
D
A
D
A
A
Thank
you,
chairman
Whitney
Westerfield,
senator
for
the
third
Senate
District
and
sponsor
from
Senate
bill.
63.
A
I'm
here
for
Senate
Bill
63,
which
is
commonly
known
as
the
crown
act,
a
bill
that
many
of
you,
if
not
most
of
you,
have
heard
before
we've
heard
testimony
on
in
the
interim
before
and
before
other
committees
and
I
can't
I
can't
take
credit
for
this
idea.
Former
representative
Attica
Scott,
who
I
was
hoping
would
be
here
this
morning
with
us,
was
the
first
to
file
it
down
in
the
house.
A
Others
have
filed
it
and
I
believe
there's
a
bill
pending
in
the
house
right
now
on
this,
but
it
does
two
very
simple
things.
It
makes
two
very
modest
changes
to
our
Civil
Rights
Act
by
adding
the
definition
of
protective
hairstyles
and
the
definition
or
explanation
of
the
term
race,
and
then
it
changes
in
chapter
158,
which
relates
to
the
conduct
conduct
of
schools.
A
It
provides
for
the
prohibition
of
discrimination
on
the
basis
of
race,
as
defined
in
the
Civil
Rights
Act,
which
is
amended
by
section
one
of
the
ACT
I've
talked
more
and
said
more
words
than
there
are
in
this
bill
that
are
new,
but
the
import
of
the
bill
is
far
it's
more
significant
than
the
number
of
words
that
are
in
it.
It
protects
hairstyles,
it
protects
the
individual
dignity,
particularly
of
students.
A
That's
why
I'm
glad
I've
got
a
student
with
me
here
today
and
he's
by
the
way,
on
behalf
of
here
of
a
group
called
the
real
young
prodigies,
who
you've
also
probably
heard
from
they've,
been
in
our
committee
a
number
of
times
before
in
other
committees,
and
they
have
been
they've
been
champions
of
this
long
before
I
got
involved,
but
I
think
it's
important
and
dry
can
talk
about
his
perspective
if
he'd
like
to
but
I,
think
it's
important
to
provide
these
protections
for
students
in
particular,
if
they've
got
hairstyles
that
are
ethnically
appropriate
for
themselves
and
and
what
they
want
to
have
and
what
their
hair
is
and
they
shouldn't
be
discriminated
against
because
of
their
hair.
A
They
shouldn't
be
forced
to
cut
their
hair.
They
shouldn't
be
forced
to
make
changes
just
to
address
the
hair
that
they've
got
because
of
the
way
that
it
is
because
it
didn't
look,
doesn't
look
like
mine
or
yours,
Mr,
chairman
and
as
the
father
of
two
biracial
children,
who
this
may
impact
one
day,
it's
important
to
me
and
so
I
wanted
to
bring
the
bill
before
the
committee
this
morning
dry.
You
want
to
say
anything.
E
Again,
I
am
jariah
McMillan
and
before
I
get
started.
Talking.
I
would
like
to
thank
I
would
like
to
thank
Carol
Senator
Carroll
for
co-spiring
in
the
bill.
I
also
like
to
thank
chairman
Westerfield
and
the
Judiciary
Committee
for
this
honorable
opportunity
to
speak
to
y'all
today.
So
I
want
to
start
this
off
by
saying:
do
any
of
y'all
have
any
younger
siblings
I
do
so
as
them
being
our
youngest
siblings.
We
all
know
that
they
could
get
on
our
nerves.
E
This
is
her
as
y'all
see
she's
wearing
her
fro,
which
she
likes
to
wear
a
lot.
She
has
red
hair
and
my
sister
has
been
bullied
because
of
her.
She
has
constantly
been
bullied
by
kids
telling
coming
up
to
her
and
telling
her
that
oh,
she
got
lice
in
her
hair.
She
got
all
that
her
and
her
curls.
She
must
got
lights
in
her
hair
and
she
I
came
home
complaining
about
it
and
she
cried
because
of
it.
She
also
and
also
been
discriminated
against.
E
E
She
had
told
my
sister
that
she
cannot
be
on
the
step
team
unless
she
has
a
slip
back
ponytail
and
when
my
sister
had
told
me
all
of
this
I
told
her
that
we
we
gotta
stand
up.
This
goes
against
the
ordinance
that
we
have
passed
in
Louisville,
which
is
creating
us
wreck
for
an
open
world
for
natural
hair,
which
you
could
wear
your
hair
without
being
discriminated
by
and
as
kentuckians.
We
should
want
to
protect
each
other.
E
That
means
my
fault.
That
means,
even
if
wearing
your
afro,
like
my
sister
or
wearing
your
mullets,
like
the
me
County
baseball
team,
did
before
they
was
forced
to
cut
off
their
mullets
and
we
have
to
come
together
now.
If
y'all
will
can
y'all,
please
repeat
after
me,
united
we
stand
divided,
we
fall.
O
Births
of
the
Judiciary
Committee,
my
name
is
Jackie
mcgranahan
and
I'm,
a
policy
strategist
with
the
ACLU
of
Kentucky.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
the
opportunity
to
testify
today
and,
of
course,
my
deepest
appreciation
to
the
sponsor
of
this
measure.
Senator
Whitney
Westerfield
and
his
consistent
support
of
measures
impacting
racial
Justice,
and
also
thank
you,
Senator
or
Senator.
Carroll
Crown,
as
your
eyes
said,
is
an
acronym
for
creating
a
respectful
and
open
world
for
natural
hair.
O
This
law
was
first
introduced
in
California
in
2019,
and
the
first
Crown
act
expanded
the
definition
of
race
in
the
Fair
Employment
and
Housing
Act
in
the
State
Education
Code
to
ensure
protection
from
discrimination
in
workplace
or
schools.
Historically,
hair
discrimination
has
been
rooted
in
different
standards
of
beauty
and
that
sometimes
black
hairstyles
can
be
viewed
as
unprofessional,
unprofessional
or
unkempt,
and
this
bill
would
not
affect
if
there's
a
law
requiring
everyone
to
wear
hair
nets,
then
this
this
isn't
what
we're
talking
about.
O
This
is
only
in
regards
to
singling
out
a
black
student
or
employee
for
some
for
a
different
reason
than
other
employees.
So
hair
discrimination
is
a
real
issue
in
ensuring
these
protections
are
in
place
for
all.
Kentuckians
is
a
step
in
the
right
direction
towards
preventing
and
eliminating
discrimination
for
any
reason
and
many
Kentucky
communities
have
passed,
have
passed
local
ordinances,
including
Covington
and
Louisville,
and
this
bill
passed
in
Tennessee,
so
we're
hoping
that
Kentucky
can
be
the
next
state
to
pass
this
legislation.
F
You
thank
you
Mr
chairman,
and
so
that
I
don't
sound
anything,
but
normal
I'll
tell
you
who
I
am
I'm.
My
great-grandmother
great
great
grandmother's,
full
Cherokee,
Indian
I'm
married
to
a
Panamanian,
so
just
get
that
out
on
the
table
who
I
am
and
what
have
you.
I
have
biracial
children
also
and
they're
ones,
real
lighting,
the
other
and
was
more.
He
got
people
walk
up
to
him,
say
sam
Wick
and
you
sign
my
autograph
okay.
K
F
The
real
question
I
have
is
just
what
she
alluded
to
Mr
chairman
senator
now
down
there,
but
I.
Don't
want
I
work
in
factories
where
you
couldn't
have
long
hair.
You
had
to
have
short
hair
because
you
had
Machinery
above
you
that
would
twirl
and
go
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
won't
be
impacted.
F
I
also
worked
at
a
Burger
Chef
Restaurant
before
I
got
drafted
in
the
Army,
where
you
had
to
have
certain
things
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure,
because
this
as
a
lawyer,
this
is
very
straightforward
and
I,
don't
know
how
it
will
impact
if
any,
that
part
of
the
workforce.
That's
all
I'm,
really
inquiring
about
that.
F
He
offered
us
all
a
thousand
dollars
a
piece
to
go,
get
that
all
cut
off,
but
we
didn't-
and
that
was
back
in
early
70s,
late
60s
and
early
70s
when
I
got
out
of
the
army.
So
that's
the
question
I
have?
Is
anybody
checked
about
this
language
being
interpreted
wrongfully
to
cause
that
business
organization
company,
which
is
required
sometimes
under
workers,
compensation
laws
to
provide
a
safe
place
of
employment?
Do
all
what's
necessary?
I
just
don't
want
any
problems.
I.
F
G
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman.
Is
this
just
for
schools,
or
is
this
schools,
employment
anywhere
I.
A
Think
it's
for
everyone
everywhere,
but
the
second
section
of
the
bill
makes
it
applied
directly
to
schools
as
well.
I
mean
we're
changing
the
Civil
Rights
Act.
So
that's
there,
but.
M
G
So
if-
and
this
is
a.
A
G
Had
a
varsity
football
team
and
on
the
varsity
football
team,
all
the
young
men
were
required
to
have
crew
cuts
on
that
varsity
football
team.
G
In
the
in
the
jails
and
prisons
I've
run
over
the
years
we
had,
we
had
haircut
requirements
for
certain
units.
Honor
units
would
all
have
their
their
hair
cut
real
short,
they
had
more
privileges,
and
that
would
be
a
problem
as
far
as
that's
concerned.
I
would
think
so.
Okay,
what?
If
a
a
white
student
or
let's
say
a
non-black
student,
had
long
hair?
G
Would
they
have
the
same
protection?
Yes,
sir.
E
This
this
ordinance
is
for
everybody,
like
I,
said
before
the
Meade
County
baseball
team.
They
all
had
mullets,
all
of
them
was
white,
they
was
forced
to
cut
off
all
their
mullets.
Demolish
was
a
way
of
showing
their
bond
in
a
connection
with
each
other,
and
they
was
forced
to
cut
it
off.
G
And
I,
thank
you
for
sharing
that
with
me.
We
just
disagree
and
that's
why
I
can't
support
this
legislation
down
through
history,
Sports,
all
kinds,
uniforms.
J
G
Kinds
of
situations
where
haircuts
and
uniformity
have
been
used
in
a
traditional
way
to
for
all
kinds
of
things
that
make
units
better
or
not
worse,
so
I
just
don't
understand
the
motivations
of
it.
It
would
seem
to
me
that
if
it
does
apply
to
everyone,
then
that
means
there
can
be
no
rules
if
it
applies
to
everyone
so
I.
For
that
reason,
I
can't
support
it.
P
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman,
first
of
all,
I
want
to
thank
you,
Senator
Westerfield,
for
bringing
this
legislation
and
before
so
I
want
to
thank
our
guests
from
stepping
forward.
I
know
you
step
forward
on
a
number
of
occasions,
and
various
individuals
have
appeared
before
us
in
one
capacity
or
another
to
deal
with
this
issue.
I
just
wanted
to
this
is
not
a
question.
Mr
chairman,
this
is
more
of
a
observation
and
a
comment.
You
know,
I
think
you
can't
look
at
something
like
this
in
just
a
silo.
P
You
have
to
understand
that
we
are
as
a
society
evolving
and
we
do
have
a
history
that
is
manifesting
itself
each
and
every
day,
and
because
of
that
and
without
attention
such
as
being
offered
here,
this
is
my
opinion.
Then
you
don't
have
an
opportunity
to
reaffirm
individual
dignity
and
respect,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day
it
gets
down
to
that
confirmation
of
the
individual
and
how
they
regard
themselves.
So
I
do
understand
some
of
the
concerns.
P
If
it's
safety
involved
I
understand
that
that
issue
would
have
to
be
dealt
with
in
the
context
of
safety,
but
sometimes
what
we
do.
As
Society
is
that
we
particularly
majority
to
those
who
are
not
in
the
majority
in
that
Society,
we
impose
our
image
and
our
our
determination
as
to
what
is
good
bad.
What's
beautiful
and
what's
not
and
even
sub
subconsciously,
we
do
it.
It's
not
like
someone
joined,
run
around
necessarily
trying
to
be
angry
or
mad
at
somebody.
P
C
K
K
Of
what
they
did
honestly
to
Jews
in
the
Holocaust,
the
first
thing
that
happened
to
you
when
you
showed
up
at
a
camp
was
they
shaved,
your
head?
I,
don't
care
if
you
were
a
man,
I,
don't
care
if
you're,
a
woman
I
don't
care.
If
you
were
a
child,
they
shaved
your
head
and
they
did
that
to
dehumanize
you.
K
D
This
had
a
very
quick
question:
would
this
pertain
to
individuals
in
the
military
like
Kentucky,
National,
Guard
or
Kentucky,
State,
Police
or
anything
of
that
nature?
How
would
that
work?
If
you
thought
about
that.
A
Senator
I,
don't
know
the
answer
to
that
question.
My
my
first
gut
reaction
unless
Jackie's
got
an
answer
from
other
states
experience.
My
first
reaction
is
that
they
have
to
abide
by
their
own
set
of
rules,
the
code
of
military
Justice
or
other
installation
standards
and
various
my
instinct
is
that
it
would
not
apply
to
them,
but
I
can't
say
that
I've
researched
that
or
had
anyone
on
staff
look
into
that
I
can
try
to
get
an
answer
that
question
for
you
that's
more
concrete
than
my
gut,
but
that's
all
I've
got
right
now.
A
A
C
So
if
my
secretary
decided
to
come
in
tomorrow
with
a
pink
Spike
due
into
the
office-
and
you
know
wearing
a
shirt
that
says
Fu
and
you
know
really
which
I
don't
I
know,
my
secretary
would
never
do
that.
But
if
she
did
could
I
say
you
know
you
need
to
you
know.
This
is
not
the
image
I
want
to
present.
For
my
business,
you
need
to
come
in
with
you
know,
a
more
traditional
look
and
a
professional
look
just
similar
to
the
address
code
that
we
adopted
on
the
senate
floor.
A
So
the
shirt
this
bill
doesn't
speak
to
in
your
in
your
fact
pattern
there.
So
I
can't
speak
to
the
shirt,
but
as
the
employer
I
assume,
you
might
be
able
to
impose
a
dress
code
for
your
office,
but
again
that
that's
not
related
to
this
bill.
The
hairstyle.
If,
if
she
were
to
come
in
with
a
hairstyle
that
was
her
natural
hair,
I'm,
not
sure
if
the
pink
would
qualify
here
or
or
like
a
a
mohawk
or
something,
if
that's
what
she
wanted
to
have
that
sort
of
hairdo.
A
But
this
protects
hair,
including
protective
hairstyles
and
looking
at
the
language
protective
hairstyles
includes-
and
these
are
just
examples-
it's
not
limited
this
braids
locks
and
twists,
but
that
they
are
historically
associated
with
race,
including,
but
not
limited
to
hair
texture
and
protective
hairstyles
like
locks
and
twists
and
braids.
So
if
she
can
make
the
case
that
that
that
was
historically
associated
with
her
race,
then
I'd
say
she
would
be
protected
and
you'd
have
to
offer
her
offer
her.
A
Some
sort
of
reasonable
accommodation
outside
of
that
I
think
you
could
probably
impose
standards.
Okay,.
C
O
Well,
she
can't
this
is
would
be
in
regards
to
instances
if
you
have
a
rule
in
your
office,
that
we
have
to
look
professional,
and
this
rule
applies
to
everyone
and
it's
not
being
used
as
a
proxy
for
just
black
people,
then
absolutely
not
like.
You
can
have
rules
that
we
have
to
be
professional
and
of
course
they
could
file
the
complaint
to
the
commission
and
then
they
would
determine
from
there
is
this
discriminate
or
is
it
the
applied
rule?
Yeah?
Okay
is.
A
C
K
K
G
D
Absolutely
thank
you
I'm
going
to
vote
I.
This
is
a
legislative
process,
as
you
pointed
out
earlier,
and
did
ask
those
questions
about
the
National,
Guard
and
Kentucky
State
Police
I
would
like
to
have
those
resolved,
but
for
today's
purpose
of
a
vote
I.
Yes,
sir.
Thank.