After assuaging members’ concerns about the breadth of the proposal, the state Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday unanimously advanced a bill enhancing prosecutors’ ability to charge people for intimidating victims or witnesses.

Existing law criminalizes the intimation of a victim or witness to a legal proceeding, but Senate Bill 24 would explicitly cover the intimidation of any person who may have information relevant to a criminal investigation. Gordon McLaughlin, the district attorney for Larimer and Jackson counties, explained that the measure would address threats to victims prior to the involvement of authorities.

“The only protections are once the criminal process starts, once a case actually exists. Right now we have a large and dangerous gap between the initiation of the crime and the actual judicial process,” McLaughlin said.

The bill also makes it a crime to threaten people who the perpetrator believes can influence the victim or witness. Some committee members, however, were skeptical about how the proposal would assist with the prosecution of threats. Sen. Julie Gonzales, D-Denver, responded to a story McLaughlin told about unsuccessfully prosecuting a person who told his victim that he would harm a deputy district attorney assigned to a domestic violence case.

“But under the example that you provided, you prosecuted the case,” Gonzales said. “You filed a charge.”

Correct, McLaughlin responded, but jurors told him after the trial that the instructions about the law “didn’t make sense to them.”

Elsewhere, senators questioned the bill’s reference to intimidation that happens “either directly or indirectly.”

“Indirect is excessively broad to me. You’re just adding a word that gives you more leeway,” Sen. Robert Rodriguez, D-Denver, told the prosecutors who testified in favor of the bill. The committee ultimately removed that phrase prior to advancing SB 24.

An analysis of the bill found that 108 people over the past two years have received convictions in Colorado for intimidating a witness or victim. The Denver Post once reported that three-quarters of gang-related prosecutions in Denver involved witness intimidation. Panelists before the Judiciary Committee indicated that intimidation is also widespread in domestic violence cases.

A representative of the Denver District Attorney’s Office said that domestic abusers can influence their victims even before criminal charges occur, telling them, “I’m going to kill you if you open the door to police,” threatening to turn in their partner to immigration authorities, or saying, “If you talk or cooperate with the investigation, I will post this nude photo of you.”

“We cannot solve crimes without a witness,” said Sen. Rhonda Fields, D-Aurora, the sponsor of SB 24.

Defense attorneys who testified also requested changes to SB 24. James Karbach from the Office of the Colorado State Public Defender asked for defense witnesses to be covered just as witnesses for the prosecution are. He added that there is already a way to charge people with making an indirect threat – for example, if a person in jail asks a friend or relative to deliver a message to the victim.

“If you direct or aid or encourage any other person to commit a crime, you are just as guilty of the crime under Colorado law. There’s not a separate charge that needs to occur,” Karbach explained.

Other questions in committee revolved around whether the bill could sweep up as criminal any advice that attorneys give to their clients about speaking to authorities or similar communications by parents to their children.

Witnesses “should not be obligated, nor should anyone advising them tell them they have to cooperate with law enforcement or the prosecution,” said Tristan Gorman of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar.

The Judiciary Committee also approved an expansion of an existing program that provides text message reminders to criminal and juvenile defendants of their court dates. Senate Bill 18 would increase reminders from two to three, provide a link to access any virtual court appearances, and, crucially, convert the program from opt-in to opt-out.

“The three reasons people miss court are: they forgot, they didn’t have transportation, or they didn’t have ways for their kids to be taken care of,” said Sen. Pete Lee, D-Colorado Springs, who is sponsoring the bill. 

The Colorado Catholic Conference, Colorado State Patrol, and the state’s Judicial Department all had representatives present in support of SB 18.

When someone fails to appear in court, there may be a bench warrant issued for their arrest. Sen. John Cooke, R-Greeley, said that during his time as Weld County sheriff, he coordinated with police chiefs and the courts to clear up some of the 10,000 active warrants in his jurisdiction, including for those who failed to appear.

“It got so bad that we offered an amnesty program that if somebody came into the sheriff’s office and turned themselves in, they wouldn’t be arrested. The warrant would be vacated and they would get a new court date,” said Cooke, who is also sponsoring SB 18.

In 2021, only 20% of cases had a defendant who opted in to the text reminder program. Legislative analysts have assumed that SB 18 will increase participation by 70%.