BILL REQ. #: Z-0813.1
State of Washington | 60th Legislature | 2008 Regular Session |
Prefiled 01/09/08. Read first time 01/14/08. Referred to Committee on Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness.
AN ACT Relating to including defendants who are persons specifically authorized to assist and act at the direction of law enforcement officers for the purpose of affirmative defenses; and amending RCW 9.68A.110.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
Sec. 1 RCW 9.68A.110 and 2007 c 368 s 3 are each amended to read
as follows:
(1) In a prosecution under RCW 9.68A.040, it is not a defense that
the defendant was involved in activities of law enforcement and
prosecution agencies in the investigation and prosecution of criminal
offenses. Law enforcement and prosecution agencies shall not employ
minors to aid in the investigation of a violation of RCW 9.68A.090 or
9.68A.100. This chapter does not apply to lawful conduct between
spouses.
(2) In a prosecution under RCW 9.68A.050, 9.68A.060, 9.68A.070, or
9.68A.080, it is not a defense that the defendant did not know the age
of the child depicted in the visual or printed matter: PROVIDED, That
it is a defense, which the defendant must prove by a preponderance of
the evidence, that at the time of the offense the defendant was not in
possession of any facts on the basis of which he or she should
reasonably have known that the person depicted was a minor.
(3) In a prosecution under RCW 9.68A.040, 9.68A.090, 9.68A.101, or
9.68A.102, it is not a defense that the defendant did not know the
alleged victim's age: PROVIDED, That it is a defense, which the
defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence, that at the
time of the offense, the defendant made a reasonable bona fide attempt
to ascertain the true age of the minor by requiring production of a
driver's license, marriage license, birth certificate, or other
governmental or educational identification card or paper and did not
rely solely on the oral allegations or apparent age of the minor.
(4) In a prosecution under RCW 9.68A.050, 9.68A.060, or 9.68A.070,
it shall be an affirmative defense that the defendant was a law
enforcement officer or a person specifically authorized, in writing, to
assist a law enforcement officer and acting at the direction of a law
enforcement officer in the process of conducting an official
investigation of a sex-related crime against a minor, or that the
defendant was providing individual case treatment as a recognized
medical facility or as a psychiatrist or psychologist licensed under
Title 18 RCW.
(5) In a prosecution under RCW 9.68A.050, 9.68A.060, or 9.68A.070,
the state is not required to establish the identity of the alleged
victim.