The Commission of Compensation in Hawai'i

Transcription

1 State of Hawai i Department of Public Safety CRIME VICTIM COMPENSATION COMMISSION Thirty-Ninth Annual Report July 1, 2006 June 30, 2007 Commissioners Lisa A. Dunn, Chair Rebecca S. Ward Thomas T. Watts Pamela Ferguson-Brey Executive Director

2 Table of Contents Executive Summary... 1 Mission Statement... 3 Overview and History... 3 Annual Activity Operations... 4 Compensation in Action Commission Projects Medical Expense Reduction Project... 7 Restitution Recovery Project Assessment and Collection of the Crime Victim Compensation Fee Conclusion Attachment A FY2007 Cases Categorized by Crime Type... A-1 Attachment B FY2007 Case Summaries... B-1

3 Executive Summary In 1967, the Hawai i State Legislature created the Crime Victim Compensation Commission (the Commission ) to mitigate the financial impact suffered by victims of violent crime. The Commission disburses funds to pay un-reimbursed expenses for crime-related losses experienced by victims who suffer physical or emotional injury, or death, as the result of a violent crime. During Fiscal Year ( FY ) 2007, the Commission processed over 1,355 compensation payments, including 726 new applications for compensation. The Commission continues to pursue its mission to provide each claimant with compassionate and timely service. The Commission actively collaborates with numerous public and private agencies dedicated to serving crime victims as part of its efforts to improve the overall delivery of victim compensation services. In pursuing its mission, the Commission s projects include the Medical Expense Reduction Project, the Restitution Recovery Project, and the more consistent assessment and collection of the mandatory Crime Victim Compensation Fee (the Compensation Fee ) by the Judiciary. The Medical Expense Reduction Project seeks to reduce and contain increasing medical costs by: 1) requesting that medical providers accept payment of seventy percent (70%) of the fees charged (a thirty percent [30%] reduction) as payment in full for the services provided in cases with uninsured crime victims; and 2) negotiate with the several medical providers to each accept a proportionate share of the Commission s maximum award as payment in full for the services rendered in cases where total medical expenses incurred exceed the statutory maximum award of $20, The Restitution Recovery Project (the Restitution Project ) collects restitution payments from inmates and parolees, and disburses those funds to crime victims. As a result of the Restitution Project, more victims have received increased amounts of restitution payments from offenders. These increased restitution payments advance the victim s ability to recover, serve to hold the offender accountable to the victim of their crime, and assist the offender in developing a sense of self-respect by righting the wrongs they have committed. Administering the Restitution Project has allowed the Commission to identify several areas of concern. Two of these concerns, the inability to identify restitution payees and the inability of the Commission s existing database to manage complex cases, have been addressed and resolved. The remaining operating concerns will be addressed and resolved in the upcoming fiscal year. The Compensation Fee is the Commission s primary source of non-tax revenue and the assessment and collection of the Fee is vital to the Commission remaining fiscally self-sufficient. No State general funds have been appropriated for the Commission for several budget cycles, and the Commission is now funded solely from non-tax revenue and matching federal funds. Maintaining a consistent and adequate source of non-tax revenue to fund compensation for crime victims and operating expenses remains the most important fiscal issue facing the Commission. 1

4 Notwithstanding the Commission s dependence on Compensation Fee revenue, the Judiciary has repeatedly failed to assess and collect the Compensation Fee in all eligible cases. Despite the Commission s attempts to work cooperatively with the Judiciary to address this concern, nothing has been resolved. Even with the increase in the Compensation Fee passed by the Legislature in 2005 of five dollars ($5) in all categories of crimes, aggregate actual Compensation Fee collections have not reflected any meaningful increase. This shortfall remains the result of the Judiciary s ongoing failure to assess and collect the Compensation Fee in all eligible cases. The Legislature has recently become so concerned that insufficient funds were being collected to compensate violent crime victims that a resolution was passed in the 2007 session requiring the Judiciary to report its progress in ordering and collecting the mandatory Compensation Fee. While awaiting the Judiciary s report to the Legislature, the Commission will continue its court monitoring efforts and its efforts to collaborate with the Judiciary to ensure that the Compensation Fee is assessed in all eligible cases. Should there be no significant improvement in Compensation Fee collections in the near future, the Commission will be forced to request that other sources of revenue be developed so that the Commission can continue to provide the essential compensation needed to support crime victims in their recovery from the effects of violent crime. 2

5 Mission Statement The mission of the Crime Victim Compensation Commission is to equitably and efficiently provide crime victims with the services due to them under Hawai i law. In doing so, the Commission treats every victim and survivor with dignity and respect, acknowledging the tremendous impact that violent crime has upon crime victims and our society. Overview and History The Hawai i State Legislature created the Commission in 1967 to compensate victims of violent crimes for their out-of-pocket expenses, losses, and pain and suffering resulting from the crime. The Commission was only the third organization of its kind in the country when it was established. To be eligible for an award, a victim of a violent crime must report the crime to law enforcement without undue delay, apply to the Commission for compensation within eighteen (18) months after the date of the incident, and provide the Commission with documentation of their expenses and losses (i.e., medical bills, insurance statements, pay stubs, etc.) resulting from the crime. The Commission has processed over 18,000 victim applications since it was established, and presently awards approximately one million dollars per year in compensation to crime victims. These awards have assisted victims with medical costs, counseling costs, lost wages, and funeral expenses not covered by other sources. Many victims would not be able to receive rehabilitation services, counseling services, or bury a loved one without compensation awarded by the Commission. Through 2001, the Commission relied primarily on State general funds to finance compensation awards and operating costs. In 2002, the Commission became fiscally self-sufficient, relying solely on the following: Compensation Fees assessed by judges against criminal offenders Court-ordered offender restitution as reimbursement for compensation awarded Ten percent (10%) of all Hawai i inmate wages Interest income from funds on deposit Federal VOCA funds the Commission receives a sixty percent (60%) federal match for every State dollar expended to compensate victims of violent crime 3

6 Annual Activity Operations During FY07, the Commission received 726 new applications for compensation and processed 1,355 new and ongoing applications. The Commission gives each application full consideration and works diligently with every applicant to ensure accurate and efficient claims processing. FY03 was the first year that the Commission operated without expending any Hawai i taxpayer dollars. This means that all funds come from the non-tax sources listed above on Page 3 in this Report. It is, therefore, essential that the Compensation Fee be assessed and collected by the Judiciary in all eligible cases. The Commission necessarily must rely on cooperation from the Judiciary to assess and collect the Compensation Fee from convicted offenders in all eligible cases. Thank you very much for your administrative decision and order. I accept [the monetary]... award for my daughter... Thank you all very much for your help. Parent of a child sex-assault victim It is vitally important to note that Hawai i now receives a sixty percent (60%) federal match from VOCA. Therefore, every dollar of Compensation Fees not assessed by judges against, and collected from, all eligible convicted offenders is a compounded loss of one dollar and sixty cents due to the concomitant loss of the sixty percent federal match. 4

7 Compensation In Action - Compensation for Crime-Related Medical Expenses Case #1 Motor Vehicle Accident Victim The 23 year-old male Victim was involved in a motor vehicle accident where the driver was found to be under the influence of drugs. The Victim suffered a broken neck and severed spinal cord causing him to be paralyzed from the neck down. The Victim was bed or chair ridden and could only move his head and shrug his shoulders. Any hope of having a small measure of independence required a $20, electric wheelchair specially tailored to the Victim s needs. However, the Victim had exhausted all no-fault insurance benefits, and Medicaid insurance would not cover the cost of this I would like to express my profound gratitude to the Commission for the generous gift of the custom made wheelchair for my son who is a quadriplegic. I have seen how this equipment has enhanced my son s quality of living and feel that this program is very beneficial to families who could not afford this kind of equipment - Parent of Crime Victim #1 particular specialized type of wheelchair. In March 2007, the Commission awarded to the Victim the nearly $20, needed to fund the purchase of the specialized wheelchair. Case #2 Visitor Crime Victim The 23 year-old male Victim was visiting Hawai i when he was punched in the face by several unknown males. The Victim sustained various injuries, including a bilateral I want to thank you for your support and caring assistance to crime victims in your jurisdiction. The Crime Victim Compensation Commission has been a Godsend to our son. Physically, he is improving everyday from the brutal assault and robbery he suffered while he was visiting Hawai i. We are so grateful for the support and the valuable service the Crime Victim Compensation Commission provides. There is no way, even with the financial support of his family, [that he] could cover the medical expenses he incurred as a result of this assault. I can t express how much we appreciate what you have done for us. Because of all the church groups and individuals who have been praying, we all believe the Crime Victims Compensation Commission is an answer to those prayers. - Parent of Crime Victim #2 mandible fracture and intracranial hemorrhage. The Victim s medical expenses exceeded $48, within seven (7) months; the Victim did not have health insurance benefits. The Commission s awards are statutorily limited to $20,000.00, so the Commission proactively engaged in a process of negotiating with the Victim s medical care providers to discount the cost of their services, and to accept a proportionate payment of the Commission s maximum award as payment in full. The Commission is pleased to report that most of the Victim s medical care providers have accepted a partial payment from the Commission as payment in full. 5

8 Case #3 Visitor Crime Victim The Victim was on a vacation in Hawai i when he was assaulted by several unknown males. The Victim suffered a closed head injury and nasal bone fracture. The Commission awarded the Victim compensation for his out-of-pocket medical expenses, together with an award for pain and suffering. Case #4 Assault Victim When I visited Hawaii, there is no way I could have envisioned spending most of my vacation in a hospital bed. I was assaulted and robbed in Waikiki and sustained 5 broken ribs and a collapsed lung. I spent 8 days in Queens Hospital. Because of my collapsed lung, I was not permitted to fly and could not leave Hawaii as scheduled. I incurred medical expenses in excess of $30,000. In addition, I had to purchase a new airline ticket to return to Texas. While I know the Crime Victim Compensation Commission will not be able to fully cover my medical expenses. I am relieved to know that there is such an agency to turn [to] for help. I am so grateful for the assistance I received at a time of my greatest need. As soon as I have paid off my medical bills I am planning to return to Hawaii for the vacation I missed. Thanks especially [for] expedit[ing] payment so I was not completely destitute. Thank you a million times to the Crime Victim Compensation Commission for all your assistance. - Crime Victim #3 A 29 year-old male Victim was kicked in the head by an unknown male perpetrator. The Victim suffered from a skull fracture, closed head injury, and cerebral edema. The Victim required brain surgery and has continued to be nonverbal and unable to follow commands. The only facility able to provide appropriate care for the Victim was in Denver, Colorado. The Victim s condition required that the Victim be accompanied by two nurses while traveling to this facility due to the severity of his injuries. The Victim s medical provider refused to pay for transportation. The Commission awarded the Victim the more than $13, required for transportation, and the required medical care during transport, from Honolulu, Hawai i, to the specialized rehabilitation center in Denver, Colorado. 6

9 Commission Projects Medical Expense Reduction Project The Commission initiated the Expense Reduction Project in FY06 to reduce overall medical expenses for uninsured victims of violent crime. Many uninsured victims of violent crime suffer financial hardship as a result of the medical expenses incurred for the treatment of their crime-related injuries. Compensation available from the Commission for medical expenses is frequently inadequate to fully compensate the crime-related medical expenses for uninsured crime victims who are seriously injured as a result of violent crime. Compensation for crime-related medical expenses is limited under Section (b), Hawai i Revised Statutes, to a maximum of $20, in cases involving compensable medical expenses 1 for catastrophic injuries. This limit is easily exceeded when a violent crime victim is hospitalized for more than several days. Many crime victims who are uninsured fall into the gap group who make too little money to afford health insurance, and too much money to qualify for Quest medical insurance. The Commission has taken a two-pronged approach to this issue: 1. Medical Expenses Do Not Exceed the $20, Statutory Limit The Commission requests that medical providers accept 70% payment from the Commission as payment in full for their services for uninsured crime victims. In this way, the Applicant is not responsible for the remaining 30% of the expenses, and the Commission retains more funds to benefit other crime victims. 2. Medical Expenses Exceed the $20, Statutory Limit The Commission leverages the $20, maximum award against the full amount of the medical expenses owed by the Applicant by requesting that the medical providers accept the Commission s payment as payment in full. This has enabled the Commission to leverage the $20, maximum award available for compensable medical expenses to benefit the Applicant by not having any remaining balance due. While not all medical providers in the cases selected for the Expense Reduction Project agreed to take a reduced payment as payment in full, in the Expense Reduction Project cases where the Commission was successful, crime victims realized savings of almost $306, from medical bills of more than $468, in the aggregate, a savings of over sixty five percent (65%) Limitations upon award of compensation. (b) No compensation shall be awarded under this chapter in an amount in excess of $10,000; provided that, if a case involves compensable medical expenses in excess of $10,000, no compensation shall be awarded in excess of $20,000 or the actual amount of compensable medical expenses, whichever is lower. 7

10 Restitution Recovery Project in the criminal justice system, the victim of crime is almost always neglected. By requiring the convicted person to make restitution and reparation to the victim, justice is served. In so doing, the criminal repays not only society but the persons injured in the criminal s act. There is a dual benefit to this concept: the victim is repaid for his loss and the criminal may develop a degree of self-respect and pride in knowing that he or she righted the wrong committed. Sen. Stand. Comm. Rep. No 789, in 1975 Senate commentary on the Senate s intent in passing HRS section (1)(e) which authorizes Courts to order restitution. In 1975 Section (1)(e), Hawai i Revised Statutes was enacted to provide the Courts with specific statutory authority to order defendants to make restitution payments to reimburse the economic losses suffered by the victims of their crime. Since the passage of this provision, a significant number of victims have not received the court-ordered restitution that they are entitled to. Victims have found it particularly difficult to recover court-ordered restitution from sentenced felons 2 and parolees. The Judiciary previously processed restitution payments for all offenders, including inmates and parolees. For a decade, the Judiciary made efforts to divest itself of the responsibility for processing restitution payments made by inmates and parolees. During this time period, the Judiciary and the Department of Public Safety ( PSD ) had been at an administrative stalemate over who was responsible for processing restitution payments made by inmates and parolees. The system that was created to process court-ordered restitution payments was not working. In order to open a restitution account for an inmate or parolee, the Judiciary required the name and address of the victim before they would accept any restitution payments. This procedure created a significant barrier to the payment of restitution by inmates and parolees. In many cases it was difficult or impossible for PSD and the Hawai i Paroling Authority (the Paroling Authority ) to secure the name and address of the victim. Victim service providers were understandably uncomfortable about giving the names and addresses of domestic abuse, sexual assault, and other crime victims to PSD and the Paroling Authority. There were concerns that victim safety would be jeopardized if an inmate or parolee inadvertently saw the name and address of their victim in their file. Despite numerous meetings between the Judiciary, PSD, the Paroling Authority, and victim service providers, and several false starts, efforts to resolve this issue ultimately failed until the Commission stepped forward. With the support of the PSD Director, the Paroling Authority, and the Honolulu Victim Witness Kokua Program, the Commission initiated a pilot project to accept responsibility for the collection and disbursement of restitution paid by inmates and parolees. 2 Excludes inmates sentenced to incarceration as a condition of probation. 8

11 On January 1, 2003, the Commission initiated the pilot Restitution Project to collect and disburse restitution paid by inmates and parolees. The Commission has opened over 2,000 restitution cases and collected over $578, Because of the collaborative efforts between the Crime Victim Compensation Commission and the Hawai i Paroling Authority, there are more timely payments of restitution to crime victims than there have been in the past. Tommy Johnson, Administrator, Hawai i Paroling Authority in restitution to disburse to crime victims from January 1, 2003 through June 30, Information identifying the whereabouts of crime victims is kept confidential so that the safety needs of victims are being met. The barriers that made it difficult for PSD and the Paroling Authority to open restitution accounts at the Judiciary have also been eliminated. PSD and the Paroling Authority need only send restitution payments to the Commission. The Commission and the County Victim Witness Programs locate the crime victim, and the Commission disburses the restitution payment to the victim. A functional Restitution Project benefits all involved. It is now easy for Parole Officers to increase the accountability of offenders by having them repay the crime victim they injured. This Project also assists the County Victim Witness Programs in their efforts to restore the crime victims they serve. In some cases where the Commission previously provided compensation awards to crime victims for medical, mental health, or funeral costs, the Commission receives direct reimbursement of those funds, allowing more crime victims to receive assistance. 3 Restitution is the cornerstone of restorative justice. Saying we are committed to restorative justice means nothing unless we make a sincere and concerted effort to make sure victims get restitution without that -- restorative justice means nothing. If an offender is not serious about paying restitution, they are not serious about rehabilitating themselves. Dennis Dunn, Director, Victim Witness Kokua Program, Department of the Prosecuting Attorney, City and County of Honolulu 3 Section (2), Hawaii Revised Statutes, provides, in part, that the court shall order restitution to be paid to the crime victim compensation commission in the event that the victim has been given an award for compensation under chapter

12 Restitution collection from inmates and parolees 4 has increased significantly over the life of the Project. In the first year of the Restitution Project the Commission collected more than $46, and in the past year, the Commission collected more than $195, The Commission believes that the significant increase in restitution collections over the life of the Restitution Project reflect the gradual institutionalization of restitution assessment and collection by the correctional facilities and the Paroling Authority. Restitution Collection January 2003-June 2007 $120, $100, $80, $60, $40, $20, $0.00 Jan- Jun 2003 Jul- Dec 2003 Jan- Jun 2004 Jul- Dec 2004 Jan- Jun 2005 Jul- Dec 2005 Jan- Jun 2006 Jul- Dec 2006 Jan- Jun 2007 The Restitution Project has unexpectedly resulted in an increase in the collection of Compensation Fees from parolees. In the first year of the Project, the Commission collected more than $2,000.00, and in the past year the Commission collected more than $15, in Compensation Fees. While the Paroling Authority has authority to collect Compensation Fees from a parolee, the correctional facilities do not have statutory authority to garnish inmate wages to pay court ordered Compensation Fees. The Commission requested that the legislature consider a bill during the 2007 legislative session to address this issue. Compensation Fee Collections from the Restitution Project $16, $14, $12, $10, $8, $6, $4, $2, $0.00 $2, Jan - Dec 2003 $13, $13, Jan - Dec 2004 Jan - Dec 2005 $10, Jan - Dec 2006 $12, Jan - June Restitution payments are from inmates and parolees and do not include payments from inmates incarcerated as a condition of parole. 10

13 The Commission identified several areas of concern in 2007, two of which were of particular concern. These were: 1) the inability of the Commission to obtain Victim Information in order to identify restitution payees; and 2) the inability of the Commission s existing Database to manage complex restitution cases. Regarding Victim Information, the Commission has not been provided with the necessary information to ensure restitution payments are made to the proper victim. First, the Judiciary has not provided the necessary victim information to the Commission in all cases initiated after the project began on January 1, 2003, as agreed upon. Second, the Paroling Authority has been unable to provide the Commission with the necessary victim information in all cases where the offender was sentenced to pay restitution before January 1, 2003, because the information was not forwarded to them by the Judiciary, as agreed upon. Third, victim witness programs on all islands, except Kauai, do not have standardized procedures to retain victim information for restitution cases. Finally, prosecutors do not have standardized procedures relating to restitution, which results in restitution orders that are not uniform. To address these concerns, the Commission initiated training for victim witness program staff and prosecutors in an attempt to better preserve victim information to identify victims who should receive restitution, and to produce uniform and clearly written restitution orders. In addition, Victim Witness Kokua Services, Department of the Prosecuting Attorney for the City and County of Honolulu, has developed a restitution case tracking system and is in the process of implementing procedures to retain the victim information in all cases. Regarding the Database, the Microsoft Access database currently in place is unable to manage complex cases resulting in problems tracking the collection of restitution from offenders and paying restitution to victims. The existing database is unable to: 1) differentiate between payments received by other agencies and payments received directly by the Commission; 2) recognize offender overpayments; and 3) balance accounts with missing checks, stale-dated checks, or cancelled checks. Moreover, some of the checks that were received from correctional facilities did not include sentencing documents, included incorrect inmate balances, contained incorrect payments, and did not separately account for offenders with multiple cases. To address these concerns, the Commission, in partnership with PSD, created a new database that links the correctional facilities directly with the Commission s Restitution Project to eliminate accounting issues and to improve communication and the sharing of necessary offender account information. In addition, the Commission worked with the business managers of each of the correctional facilities to streamline restitution collection from offenders. 11

14 Assessment and Collection of the Mandatory Crime Victim Compensation Fee The Legislature established the mandatory Crime Victim Compensation Fee in 1998 to provide a funding base for the Commission to begin the process of becoming fiscally self-sufficient. The mandatory Compensation Fee must be assessed by judges against every offender who is convicted of, or who enters a deferred plea (DAG/DANC) to, a petty misdemeanor, misdemeanor, or felony, and is able to pay the fee. 5 The Commission s ability to maintain self-sufficiency is in jeopardy when the Judiciary fails to order and collect the Compensation Fee in all eligible cases. It is apparent from the data in the chart below that the Judiciary fell nearly one million dollars short of collecting the aggregate amount of its own estimate of Compensation Fee collections for fiscal years 1999, 2001, and Compensation Fee Collection by the Judiciary $1,000,000 Dollar Amounts $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 Actual Deposits to Commission Fund $277,308 $512,307 $649,005 $677,163 $763,425 $817,075 $818,929 $826,810 $853,850 Actual Collections Per Judiciary $428,992 $583,522 $650,563 $677,013 Maximum Collection Estimated by Judiciary $844,913 $969,131 $778,262 Note: Blank fields in the table indicate that the data for that year was not available. FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 The Commission is unable to determine the precise magnitude of the more recent Compensation Fee collection shortfall because the Judiciary has not provided Compensation Fee estimates since However, courtroom surveys conducted by the Commission indicate that the failure of the Judiciary to order and collect the mandatory Compensation Fee remains a significant problem. As a result of Commission courtroom surveys, the following areas of concern were identified: 5 Section , Hawai i Revised Statutes, provides that the court shall assess a Compensation Fee against every convicted offender, or offender who enters a deferred plea, and who is or will be able to pay the Fee. Fees are assessed as follows: 1. a $30 fee for a petty misdemeanor; 2. a $55 fee for a misdemeanor; and 3. a $105 to $505 fee for a felony. 12

15 The Compensation Fee was waived in some cases while other fees and fines with lower statutory priority were assessed by the judge; Some judges are unaware of the existence of the Compensation Fee; Some judges are unaware about which offenses trigger the mandatory assessment of the Compensation Fee; The Compensation Fee was not assessed in all cases for each eligible offense committed by a single offender; The Compensation Fee was waived in some cases without offenders requesting a waiver or proffering any evidence that they were unable to pay; The Compensation Fee was waived in some cases without any finding regarding the offender s ability to pay the Fee, or lack thereof, or any explanation as to why the Fee was not assessed; and The Compensation Fee was waived in some cases for offenders who indicated an ability to pay without further explanation by the Court. Based on the foregoing, the Commission determined that the Judiciary did not order or collect the Compensation Fee in all eligible cases. Despite Commission attempts to work with the Judiciary to address these concerns, nothing has been resolved. When attempts to collaborate with the Judiciary to address these concerns failed, the Commission was compelled to request an increase in the amount of Compensation Fees assessed. The Legislature responded in 2005 and increased the mandatory Compensation Fee by five dollars ($5) in all crime categories. Although the Commission estimated an increase in revenue for fiscal year 2006 of $118,600, revenue only increased by $7,881. A courtroom survey by the Commission indicated that the nominal increase was the direct result of the Judiciary s ongoing failure to order the Compensation Fee in all eligible cases, rather than any meaningful reduction in the number of offenders with criminal cases eligible for assessment of the Fee. The Legislature has recently become so concerned that insufficient funds were being collected to compensate violent crime victims, that the Legislature passed a resolution in the 2007 session requiring the Judiciary to report its progress in ordering and collecting the mandatory Compensation Fee. The Legislature specifically requested information on: (1) actual versus estimated Compensation Fee collections; (2) the number of eligible cases in which the Fee was ordered; (3) the number of eligible cases in which the Fee was collected; (4) the number of eligible cases in which the Fee was waived; and (5) in eligible cases where the Fee was waived, the criteria for waiving the Fee. The Commission remains committed to its efforts to ensure that the mandatory Compensation Fee is assessed by the Judiciary in all eligible cases where the offender has the ability to pay. Should there be no significant improvement by the Judiciary in this area in the near future, the Commission will be forced to request that other sources of revenue be developed so that the Commission can continue to provide the essential compensation needed to support crime victims in their recovery from the effects of violent crime. 13

16 Conclusion For each of the past 39 years, the Commission has provided enhanced levels of service to the victims of violent crime. The Commission has streamlined case processing by increasing management efficiency, reducing the pending case backlog, cultivating strategic partnerships with other public and private agencies, and making significant progress towards fiscal self-sufficiency. Even with all of these improvements, the Commission will maintain its pursuit of strategies to further improve services to crime victims. The Commission will continue to diligently pursue its mission to mitigate the costly and emotionally devastating impact of violent crime on citizens and visitors through continued collaborative efforts, further improvements in management efficiency, and strong staff commitment. 14

17 CASE SUMMARIES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 July 1, 2006 June 30, 2007 Listed by County: Hilo Kauai Kona Maui Oahu

18 2007 Active Cases by Crime Type State-Wide ASSAULT ABUSE OF FAMILY MEMBER ATTEMPTED MURDER MURDER/MANSLAUGHTER KIDNAPPING NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE NEGLIGENT INJURY SEXUAL ASSAULT - CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT - ADULT 2007 Active Cases by Crime Type Hilo ASSAULT ABUSE OF FAMILY MEMBER ATTEMPTED MURDER MURDER/MANSLAUGHTER KIDNAPPING NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE NEGLIGENT INJURY SEXUAL ASSAULT - CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT - ADULT

19 2007 Active Cases by Crime Type Kauai ASSAULT ABUSE OF FAMILY MEMBER ATTEMPTED MURDER MURDER/MANSLAUGHTER KIDNAPPING NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE NEGLIGENT INJURY SEXUAL ASSAULT - CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT - ADULT Active Cases by Crime Type Kona ASSAULT ABUSE OF FAMILY MEMBER ATTEMPTED MURDER MURDER/MANSLAUGHTER KIDNAPPING NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE NEGLIGENT INJURY SEXUAL ASSAULT - CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT - ADULT 2

20 2007 Active Cases by Crime Type Maui ASSAULT ABUSE OF FAMILY MEMBER ATTEMPTED MURDER MURDER/MANSLAUGHTER KIDNAPPING NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE NEGLIGENT INJURY SEXUAL ASSAULT - CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT - ADULT 2007 Active Cases by Crime Type Oahu ASSAULT 176 ABUSE OF FAMILY MEMBER 54 ATTEMPTED MURDER MURDER/MANSLAUGHTER KIDNAPPING NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE NEGLIGENT INJURY SEXUAL ASSAULT - CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT - ADULT

21 STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT JULY 1, 2005 TO JUNE 30, 2006 Hilo Victim Total F 46 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 47 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ F 31 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 35 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 25 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 22 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $5, M 25 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $2, M 15 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL NOT A PROPER APPLICANT $ F 46 NOT COVERED CRIME DENIAL NOT COVERED CRIME $ M 18 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 18 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 19 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 34 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 52 NOT COVERED CRIME DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ M 21 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 41 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 12 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 21 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 21 KIDNAPPING AWARD $1, Attachment B - 1

22 Hilo Victim Total M 44 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 15 ASSAULT CHILD AWARD $ M 2 ASSAULT CHILD AWARD $ M 55 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 23 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER DENIAL CONTRIBUTORY $ F 44 KIDNAPPING AWARD $1, F 17 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ F 32 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 32 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 27 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 32 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 31 NEGLIGENT INJURY II DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 44 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 57 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 16 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 34 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 16 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 44 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 39 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 39 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 24 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 27 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 34 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 38 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 11 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $1, M 31 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $2, Attachment B - 2

23 Hilo Victim Total F 43 NOT COVERED CRIME DENIAL NOT COVERED CRIME $ F 46 NOT COVERED CRIME DENIAL NOT COVERED CRIME $ F 46 NOT COVERED CRIME DENIAL NOT COVERED CRIME $ F 49 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 37 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 56 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 32 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 19 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 32 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $3, F 25 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 18 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 47 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 21 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 27 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 40 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 46 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 18 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 43 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 24 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 44 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 43 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 23 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ F 56 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 27 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 44 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ Attachment B - 3

24 Hilo Victim Total F 20 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 61 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 11 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 12 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 40 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 31 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 56 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 24 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 13 ASSAULT CHILD AWARD $ F 37 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 56 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ M 33 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, M 53 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 16 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 16 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 54 NOT COVERED CRIME DENIAL NO POLICE REPORT $ F 30 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 31 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 16 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 23 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 26 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 15 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 59 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 18 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 28 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 39 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 23 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ Attachment B - 4

25 Hilo Victim Total M 28 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $2, M 59 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 30 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 26 NEGLIGENT INJURY I DUI INJURY DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 35 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 18 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 41 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 17 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 33 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 45 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 21 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 18 ATTEMPTED MURDER AWARD $ M 23 ATTEMPTED MURDER DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 18 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 40 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $1, F 28 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 8 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 49 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 56 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 15 NEGLIGENT INJURY II DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 21 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 72 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 50 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 45 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $2, M 22 KIDNAPPING AWARD $1, F 2 KIDNAPPING AWARD $1, M 26 NOT COVERED CRIME DENIAL NOT COVERED CRIME $0.00 Attachment B - 5

26 Hilo Victim Total M 53 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 49 ATTEMPTED MURDER AWARD $4, Attachment B 6

27 Kauai Victim Total F SEXUAL ASSAULT CHILD BY FAMILY AWARD $1, F SEXUAL ASSAULT CHILD BY FAMILY AWARD $1, F 8 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 56 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $10, F 41 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 26 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, M 18 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 0 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 3 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 4 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ M 5 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ M 28 ATTEMPTED MURDER AWARD $ F 29 ATTEMPTED MURDER DENIAL NOT A PROPER APPLICANT $ F 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 55 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 43 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 8 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 10 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 35 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $20, F 24 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 51 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 44 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER DENIAL NOT COVERED CRIME $ F 10 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 13 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 28 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 20 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $4, F 6 NEGLIGENT INJURY I DUI INJURY DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $0.00 Attachment B - 7

28 Kauai Victim Total M 3 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 16 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD DENIAL DUPLICATE CLAIM $ F 5 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 15 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $1, F 21 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 51 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 39 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 53 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 22 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 30 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ F 35 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 10 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 45 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $2, F 27 HOMICIDE, MURDER, MANS - ADULT AWARD $4, M 21 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ M 22 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, F 25 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 15 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, M 15 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ Attachment B - 8

29 Kona Victim Total M 23 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 42 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 13 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 51 NOT COVERED CRIME DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ F 53 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 50 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ M 24 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 57 NEGLIGENT INJURY II DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 47 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ F 46 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ M 18 NEGLIGENT INJURY II DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ F 29 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 13 ASSAULT CHILD DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ M 55 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 20 NEGLIGENT INJURY I DUI INJURY DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ M 41 HOMICIDE, MURDER, MANS - ADULT AWARD $1, F 39 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 50 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 20 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 18 NEGLIGENT INJURY I DUI INJURY DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 33 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 39 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 19 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 37 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ M 0 ASSAULT CHILD BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 82 ATTEMPTED MURDER AWARD $ F 34 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ Attachment B - 9

30 Kona Victim Total M 56 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 27 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $5, F 27 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 22 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 38 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 0 HOMICIDE, MURDER, MANS - CHILD AWARD $ M 26 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 31 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $8, F 15 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 37 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 39 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 15 ASSAULT CHILD AWARD $ F 24 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, F 5 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $3, F 22 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 29 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 38 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 25 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 24 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 3 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 58 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, F 35 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 13 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 22 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 39 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 55 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $0.00 Attachment B - 10

31 Kona Victim Total F 29 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 31 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 25 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 30 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $1, M 51 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 51 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 18 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 55 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 21 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 24 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 26 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 22 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 19 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ M 42 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ M 49 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ Attachment B - 11

32 Maui Victim Total M 48 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $ M 37 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $2, M 31 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, F 48 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 34 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 53 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ M 42 ATTEMPTED MURDER AWARD $ F 26 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 54 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $2, F 55 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ M 69 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ M 34 NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE I, DUI DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 39 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 11 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 43 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $13, M 44 ATTEMPTED MURDER AWARD $8, F 19 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 10 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 53 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $2, M 52 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $3, F 31 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 12 ASSAULT CHILD AWARD $ F 87 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, F 42 ASSAULT ADULT BY FAMILY MEMBER AWARD $ F 31 NEGLIGENT INJURY I DUI INJURY DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 77 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ Attachment B - 12

33 Maui Victim Total F 27 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 52 ATTEMPTED MURDER AWARD $ M 42 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ M 27 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, F 19 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL BEYOND FILING PERIOD $ F 83 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, F 32 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 37 NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE I, DUI DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 55 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $1, F 42 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 12 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 7 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 28 NEGLIGENT INJURY II DENIAL COLLATERAL SOURCE $ F 46 NEGLIGENT INJURY I DUI INJURY DISMISSAL APPLICANT WITHDREW APPLICAION $ M 41 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $2, M 3 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 19 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 39 SEXUAL ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 77 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $ F 13 ASSAULT CHILD AWARD $ M 35 ASSAULT ADULT AWARD $7, F 16 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ M 4 ASSAULT CHILD AWARD $2, F 13 ASSAULT ADULT DENIAL DUPLICATE CLAIM $ F 14 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD AWARD $ F 16 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD DENIAL INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE $0.00 Attachment B - 13