 We're back live, dealing with an amendment to H145 draft 2.1 by BNH, Brynn Hare, and we're looking at two amendments to H145. The first, Brynn, do you want to describe? Mr. Chair, was this sent to us? It's on our webpage, but can you share the page? Sure thing. Brynn is going to share it, so everybody can see it. Okay. How's that? That's great. Okay. So, for the record, Brynn Hare from Legislative Council. So this is draft 2.1 of the amendment to H145. And as the committee was just discussing, this is first an amendment to section 4 of the Justify a Bahamaside statute that includes some language from the Vermont Supreme Court cases that Attorney Thompson raised earlier that is really kind of taken directly from those cases that are interpreting the words just and necessary in subdivision one. So I know that when we were talking before, I said I would add this language to both one and two. I've only added it in two because the language just and necessary already appears in subdivision one. And that is the court has interpreted just and necessary to mean this highlighted language division two, which is that the person had to have reasonably believed that they were an imminent peril. And that it was necessary to repel that peril with deadly force. I've only included it here because otherwise I think it would be redundant and it may even lead to some confusion. If you if you include that phrase along with the phrase just and necessary. So the other question I'd like to raise before I go to the second instance of amendment is that because I'm sort of drafting on the fly here and I haven't had some time to think this through the committee may want to go with just a repetition of the of this phrase just and necessary. Instead of the language from the, from the Vermont Supreme Court, it would probably be good to hear from Attorney Thompson on that point as well. Just for consistency sake I haven't really thought thought it through yet. How you would want to move forward with that if you would want to use the same language or this. The court has used interpreting the phrase just and necessary. But as I look at one, you're talking about just and necessary defense of certain individuals. And to your talking about what might be just and necessary in suppressing a person committing to attempting to commit murder sexual assault aggravated sexual assault. And then we get into the property problem of burglary. That's where I had the problem. Certainly, if you're suppressing someone committing murder. That is reasonable to expect. Yeah, that makes sense to make to make it clear that the requirement really is that there must be some imminent peril that doesn't make sense to me. I don't know other, not being an attorney, but to me that's why it makes sense to have it into anybody who wants to comment either Julio or So Julio Thompson ages office, I think the amendment that's provided on the screen here with sub to describing the reasonable belief standard, relating to imminent peril. It's consistent with the courts interpretation of justifiable homicide or use of force that would resolve an injury to others so I think it's I think it's fine I think the I think great likelihood of confusion by what's crafted here as because you are identifying certain crimes that themselves may not necessarily involve significant or imminent peril like I'd like the example I gave or someone's being pushed down. So to be to be robbed of their backpack may not be something that's really presenting them in significant jeopardy and yet you wouldn't expect someone else to discharge a firearm so I think it's helpful. You want to go to the next one. Which is simply taking out September and shorting of October. Oh dear. Can everyone can everyone hear me. I think my. Yeah. Okay. So the next instance of amendment is just to replace September with October in the effective date section. So that would make all of the bill effective on October 1, except for the repeal section, and the effective date section, which would take effect on July 1 and if you'll recall that's necessary because the standards for law enforcement use of force that passed last year take effect on July 1 so you need to repeal those on July 1 if you don't want them to go into effects. Thank you Brent very helpful. Any committee any comments. Thank you. Pretty well. I'll move the amendments. Senator Sears has moved that we amend H 145 as seen in draft 2.1. Is there any further discussion. Hearing none. Peggy could you please follow. Sure. Senator Benning. Yes. Senator Nica. Senator White. Yes. Senator Baruth. Yes. Yes. Now is there a motion to report. H 145 favorably as amended. Make a motion we report. H 145. As amended. Positively. Senator Nica has moved that we. Report H 145 positive favorably as amended. Any further discussion. Okay Peggy could you please call the roll. Senator Benning. Yes. Senator Nica. Yes. Senator White. Yes. Senator Baruth. Yes. Senator Sears. Yes. Yes. Senator Baruth would you like to report this again. If you did the first. Version. I wouldn't like to report it now. Okay. If you would, if you assign it to me, I will. But. That's my preference. Is there anybody else who would be. Jumping at the. Report this. I suppose at some point a defense attorney should talk about what the defense attorney does. And this might be an opportunity to say that. If you don't mind that commentary being injected into the. I do not mind that commentary, Senator Benning. And I think it would be helpful to have. Have you report these amendments and the bill. So. Okay. If you could get me a quick summary and Peggy, if you get me the witnesses, please. Yep. And I'll end Bryn send me the after you get from drafting the version. Okay. So I'm going to go over your comments about defense attorneys with Senator Baruch before you make. Joe. He's heard it a few times. We have a long tradition of running things by each other. That's, that's what I was referencing. Anything else committee committee. We've got a really tight schedule tomorrow on the appropriations issues. So we're going to have to wait until the law comes to pass the testify. Additionally, the, the department, the office of child support is really concerned. That there was no mention of magistrates in the courts. And they have a tremendous backlog of child support. So we have Robin Arnell coming. We also have a real concern. about the workload that they're under if we do the reopening. The BSEA is coming and they're proposing 14 new victims advocates in the base. I believe that John Campbell is going to advocate 14 new assistance. I think those are temporary. Assistant what? The advocate? The state's attorneys. 14 new to the state's attorneys? Yeah, if you think there's 14 of them. One could argue about the necessity in one particular county. But I don't mention that. So it's tight and we only scheduled 45 minutes. We'll see what happens. If worse comes to worse and we run to 1215, is there anybody who would have a problem with that tomorrow? No, I guess I could. Yeah, I'm supposed to have something at 12, but I'll put it off until 1215. Okay. I won't go any later. But the good news is today we get out half an hour early. In order to prepare for caucus. Yeah. I think we're going to have to wait for the Democrats. So anyway.