Clashing bills threaten promise to revamp state bail rules

OLYMPIA — After the slaying of four Lakewood police officers in November, state lawmakers from both parties promised changes aimed at stopping dangerous felons like Maurice Clemmons before they turn deadly.

But now a centerpiece of that effort — a constitutional amendment that would give judges more power to deny bail to potentially dangerous criminal defendants — is hung up in a political fight as the Legislature enters the final weeks of its 60-day session.

Senate leaders unveiled a bail proposal Thursday they touted as a careful balance between public safety and civil liberties.

But that plan was immediately trashed by House lawmakers, who prefer a version that would keep more defendants behind bars pending trial.

At issue is how big a change to make to Washington's strong guarantee of bail for criminal defendants. The state constitution requires that all defendants be given a chance to post bail, except for those facing death-penalty charges.

That's why two judges couldn't deny bail to Maurice Clemmons, the Arkansas parolee who murdered the four Lakewood officers Nov. 29 in a Parkland coffee shop. Less than a week earlier, Clemmons had been in jail on child-rape and assault charges. Though he was facing a possible "third strike," he was freed on $190,000 bail.

As the deadliest attack on police in state history, the killings of the Lakewood officers have provided strong pressure for lawmakers to change the bail laws, as well as to look at other ways to protect the public and police from dangerous felons.

But Senate leaders said they want to make sure any changes to bail laws are rational and not inflamed by the emotions of the moment.

"We need to change the law to the extent that we've been shown a real need to change. We do not need to respond to the additional emotional part," said Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"Constitutional amendments are very serious things. They are not something that should be done lightly," said Sen. Mike Carrell, R-Lakewood, the ranking Republican on the judiciary panel.

Under the Senate plan, judges could deny bail for people accused of some of the most serious crimes, including murder, rape, first-degree child molestation, first-degree assault and crimes that could result in a "third strike" conviction.

That's quite a bit narrower than a plan approved by the House and supported by some law-enforcement groups.

Their version would allow judges to deny bail for any crime that could result in a maximum sentence of life in prison.

Under the House plan, bail could have been denied in 1,540 felony cases in 2009, out of 37,000 statewide. The Senate version would have affected 640.

House lawmakers said they were irritated at being shut out of Kline and Carrell's talks about which bail amendment to move forward.

"I can't remember a time when a couple folks sat down behind closed doors and didn't talk to their colleagues, didn't talk to the law-enforcement community," said Rep. Chris Hurst, D-Enumclaw, a former police officer and chairman of the House Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness Committee.

Hurst and Rep. Mike Hope, R-Lake Stevens, a Seattle police officer, said they were informed of the Senate's intent only Thursday morning, just before Kline and Carrell's proposed language was announced to the media.

"We've been trying to work with Senator Carrell from Day One of the legislative session, and it has fallen on deaf ears," said Hope.

Despite the bickering, the Kline-Carrell plan does represent a move toward compromise. An earlier version of the bill that passed the Senate would have been far more limited, and would have affected only 58 felony cases last year.

Both the current House and Senate versions would have allowed judges to deny bail in the Clemmons case.

Don Pierce, executive director of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, said his group favored "the strongest version that we can get out" of the Legislature.

But a representative of the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington said both proposals go too far.

"To really upset the balance of constitutional protections based on the heinous acts of one very disturbed individual would be an overreaction," said Shankar Narayan, legislative director for the ACLU.

The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a public hearing and possible vote on the constitutional amendment, House Joint Resolution 4220, at 8 a.m. Friday.

House and Senate leaders could then hash out their differences in a conference committee or by amending the legislation as it moves forward.

Hurst said he's confident some version will pass before the Legislature adjourns.

"We will not leave this session without this legislation. This is the most important piece of criminal-justice legislation in decades," he said.

The amendment requires a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to pass and must be approved by a public vote after that.

Jim Brunner: 206-360-8267 or jbrunner@seattletimes.com