Report — Criminal Penalty Fees Related to Sexual Exploitation Crimes, December 2020
Summary
A December 2020 report to the Legislature from the Community Services and Housing Division of the Washington State Department of Commerce, titled Criminal Penalty Fees Related to Sexual Exploitation Crimes and prepared pursuant to RCW 43.280.100, covering state fiscal year 2020. It states that Chapter 121, Laws of 2013 (ESHB 1291) levied additional fees on the crime of commercial sexual abuse of a minor and other sexual exploitation crimes. The Key Findings state that the total amount of fees collected was only $98,345 and that courts levied 71% of the total possible fee amount, with most of the amounts levied in King County. Tables list arrests, convictions, assessed fees and collected fees by county.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
- Document type
- Report
- Case
- 2020 Criminal Penalty Fees 2020 Report 1285Ca00 6A29 4C29 9A44 Bc26A39E4D57
Cite this document
“Report — Criminal Penalty Fees Related to Sexual Exploitation Crimes, December 2020.”
Original at app.leg.wa.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2020-criminal-penalty-fees-2020-report-1285ca00-6a29-4c29-9a44-bc26a39e4d57/
, SHA-256 fbd9087e4d33ead44728aaff263fad7cd46c61e48dc440af77669fc760387725.Full text
Criminal Penalty Fees Related
to Sexual Exploitation Crimes
2020 REPORT PURSUANT TO RCW 43.280.100
December 2020
COMMUNITY SERVICES AND
HOUSING DIVISION REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE
Lisa Brown, Director
2.3
Acknowledgments
Washington State Department of Commerce
Diane Klontz, assistant director, Community
Services and Housing Division
Rick Torrance, managing director, Office of Crime
Victims Advocacy
Alice Zillah, section manager, Research Services,
Community Assistance and Research Unit
Becca Duncan, research project coordinator,
Research Services, Community Assistance and
Research Unit
Washington State Department of Commerce
Rick Torrance, managing director
360-725-2059,
richard.torrance@commerce.wa.gov
OFFICE OF CRIME VICTIMS ADVOCACY
1011 Plum St. SE
P.O. Box 42525
Olympia, WA 98504-2525
www.commerce.wa.gov
For people with disabilities, this report is available
on request in other formats. To submit a request,
please call 360.725.4000 (TTY 360.586.0772)
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 3
Fee Assessments and Crime Rates .............................................................................................................. 5
How Jurisdictions Reported Expending the Funds ...................................................................................... 11
Appendix A: Distribution of Criminal Penalty Fees ...................................................................................... 13
Appendix B: Conviction and Fee Data by County ......................................................................................... 14
Appendix C: King County's Approach .......................................................................................................... 17
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 1
Executive Summary
Overview
In 2013, the Washington State Legislature passed Chapter 121, Laws of 2013 (ESHB 1291), which levied
additional fees on the crime of commercial sexual abuse of a minor (CSAM) and other sexual exploitation
crimes. The fees, ordered on persons convicted of crimes, are in addition to other criminal penalties, including
statutory fines and jail time. Local jurisdictions retain most of the revenue from these fees to fund preventive
efforts, services for victims, and law enforcement activities to reduce the commercial sale of sex. Judges may
reduce some of the fees by up to two-thirds if the judge finds, on the record, that an offender cannot pay.
Courts may not entirely waive any of the fees.
The bill directed the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) to:
"…prepare and submit an annual report to the legislature on the amount of revenue collected by local
jurisdictions under RCW 9.68A.105, 9A.88.120, or 9A.88.140 and the expenditure of that revenue [RCW
43.280.100]."
The three statutes listed above levy fees on convictions related to prostitution and the commercial sexual
exploitation of children. The specifics of these fees are discussed in more detail in Table 1: Statutes Modified
by Chapter 121, Laws of 2013 (see page 4).
This report, for state fiscal year 2020, is the seventh annual report prepared by Commerce on the fee revenue
and expenditures related to this set of crimes. See the Introduction for the full statutory requirement for this
report.
Key Findings
In state fiscal year 2020:
In total, courts assessed $223,295 in fees, but the total amount of fees collected was only $98,345.
Law enforcement officers made 120 fewer arrests for sexual exploitation crimes compared to state fiscal
year 2019. Also, there were 119 fewer convictions for such crimes compared to state fiscal year 2019.
Just over half (51%) of the courts that handed down convictions for sexual exploitation crimes levied the
required fees.
On balance, Washington state courts levied 71% of the total amount of penalty fees possible for
convictions of sexual exploitation crimes. However, most of the amounts levied were in King County.
Excluding King County, Washington state courts levied only 5% of the total amount of penalty fees possible
for convictions of sexual exploitation crimes.
As in the prior six years, courts in King County both levied and collected most of the fees – 96% and 92% of
the totals, respectively.
Conclusions
As in recent years, it does not appear that courts are ordering persons convicted of crimes to pay the amounts
that statutes require for their crimes. It is beyond the scope of this report to investigate why many courts are
not imposing these fees. Further research and judicial outreach could lead to a better understanding of why
courts do not consistently levy the fees.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 2
Introduction
Background on Revenue Collection
The three statutes listed under RCW 43.280.100 (RCW 9.68A.105, 9A.88.120, or 9A.88.140) levy fees on
convictions related to prostitution and the commercial sexual exploitation of children. The fees are in addition
to other penalties, including statutory fines and jail time. Courts levy the fees on persons convicted of crimes
who have entered into a statutory or non-statutory diversion agreement1 because of arrests for one of the
applicable crimes. Table 1 lists the statutes, the additional penalty, and the crimes to which the penalty
applies.
Statutes 9.68A.105, 9A.88.120, and 9A.88.140 describe how jurisdictions must use the revenue from the fees
collected:
Cities and counties must spend at least 50% of the revenue on prevention and rehabilitation services for
victims. Prevention includes education programs for persons convicted of crimes, such as "john school,"
which provides a curriculum on the sexual exploitation of women, legal ramifications, and confronting
and healing from sexual addiction. Rehabilitative services for victims include mental health and
substance abuse counseling, parenting skills, housing relief, education, vocational training, drop-in
centers, and employment counseling.
Jurisdictions may use up to 48% for local efforts to reduce the commercial sale of sex, including, but not
limited to, increasing enforcement of commercial sex laws.
Two percent of the revenue must be remitted quarterly to Commerce, together with a report detailing the
fees assessed, the revenue received, and how it was spent.
Judges may reduce some of the fees if the court finds, on the record, that the offender cannot pay the fee. In
those cases, judges may only reduce the fee by up to two-thirds.
Courts may not make any reductions to the fees attached to vehicle impoundment. Impounding agencies
collect these fees if a law enforcement officer impounds a vehicle used in the commission of a commercial
sexual abuse of a minor (CSAM) crime or prostitution-related crime or if other conditions are met. The owner
must pay the fee before redeeming the vehicle. Defendants found not guilty of crimes are entitled to a refund
of the fee.
1 RCW 9A.88.120 defines statutory or non-statutory agreement as an agreement under RCW 13.40.080 or any written agreement
between a person accused of an offense and a court, county, or city prosecutor, whereby the person agrees to fulfill certain conditions
in lieu of prosecution.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 3
Table 1: Statutes Modified by Chapter 121, Laws of 2013
Additional Penalty Crimes to Which Penalty Amount by Which Penalty
Statute Amount Applies Can be Reduced
9.68A.100 – Commercial Sexual
Abuse of a Minor (CSAM)
9.68A.105 $5,000 9.68A.101 – Promoting CSAM
9.68A.102 – Promoting travel for
CSAM
$50 9A.88.010 – Indecent exposure
$50 9A.88.030 – Prostitution
The court may not reduce,
waive, or suspend the payment
1st offense $1,500 of all or part of the fee
assessed unless it finds, on the
2nd offense $2,500 9A.88.090 – Permitting prostitution record, that the adult offender
9A.88.110 – Patronizing a cannot pay, in which case it
3rd and prostitute may reduce the fee by an
9A.88.120 subsequent $5,000 amount of up to two-thirds of
offenses the maximum allowable fee.
1st offense $3,000
9A.88.070 – Promoting prostitution
2nd offense $6,000
in the first degree
9A.88.080 – Promoting prostitution
3rd and in the second degree
subsequent $10,000
offenses
9A.88.140 – Vehicle impoundment
fine for:
9A.88.110 – Patronizing a
prostitute
9A.88.070 – Promoting
$500 prostitution in the first degree
9A.88.080 – Promoting
prostitution in the second
degree
9A.88.140 9A.88.085 – Promoting travel May not be waived or reduced
for prostitution
9A.88.140 – Vehicle impoundment
fine for:
9.68A.100 – CSAM
$2,500
9.68A.101 – Promoting CSAM
9.68A.102 – Promoting travel
for CSAM
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 4
Fee Assessments and Crime Rates
In state fiscal year 2020, 55 courts in Washington handed down convictions for the crimes that bear the
additional penalty fee. Of these, 26 courts -- just 47% of the total -- levied the statutorily required fees. This
discrepancy indicates that many Washington courts are not assessing the fees or are levying only a fraction of
what they could.
Kitsap County had 15 convictions for offenses ranging from indecent exposure to commercial sexual
abuse of a minor (CSAM). If judges had levied all of the fees possible, it would have totaled $13,600.
However, only $300 in fees were imposed on persons convicted of crimes.
King County Superior Court, which levies and collects far more than most courts, assessed near the
maximum possible amount of fees in state fiscal year 2020.
Pierce County Superior Court had eight convictions for the crime of CSAM, each of which carries a $5,000
fee. Given all convictions for Pierce County Superior Court, the maximum possible collection would be
$76,950. However, the court only levied $5,000 in total for all cases in state fiscal year 2020.
Franklin County Superior Court had two convictions for CSAM, for a total of $10,000 in possible fees, but
did not levy any amount at all.
Spokane County Superior Court had two convictions of promoting prostitution in the second degree, a
possible total of $6,000, but levied only $500.
Overall, courts assessed 71% of the total possible fee amount – $223,395 out of a potential $318,100. As in
the previous six years, courts in King County both levied and collected most of the fees. Therefore, excluding
King County, other Washington courts assessed 5% of the total possible fee amount - $9,906 out of a potential
$189,600. It is beyond the scope of this report to investigate why many courts are not imposing these fees.
Table 2 lists the number of arrests and convictions for the relevant crimes, the maximum possible fees that
could be assessed, the actual fees assessed and the fees collected for each county in Washington. The
maximum possible fees Appendix B contains a complete list of all courts that imposed convictions for the
applicable crimes, the amounts assessed, and the amounts collected.
Table 2: Arrests, Convictions and Fees by County - State Fiscal Year 2020
Arrests for
Applicable Convictions for Maximum Fees Fees
County Charges Applicable Charges Possible Fees Assessed Collected
Asotin 2 0 $0 $0 $0
Benton 12 0 $0 $0 $0
Chelan 4 0 $0 $1,500 $2,129
Clallam 12 0 $0 $0 $0
Clark 52 0 $0 $0 $469
Columbia 1 0 $0 $0 $0
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 5
Arrests for
Applicable Convictions for Maximum Fees Fees
County Charges Applicable Charges Possible Fees Assessed Collected
Cowlitz 22 0 $0 $0 $0
Franklin 17 4 $30,000 $0 $0
Garfield 0 1 $50 $0 $0
Grant 1 1 $50 $0 $0
Grays Harbor 25 2 $100 $1,517 $504
Island 3 1 $50 $0 $11
Jefferson 2 0 $0 $0 $0
King 403 87 $126,950 $213,389 $90,037
Kitsap 17 15 $13,600 $300 $239
Kittitas 4 2 $100 $0 $0
Klickitat 2 0 $0 $0 $0
Lewis 5 12 $600 $50 $0
Mason 2 1 $50 $0 $0
Okanogan 3 3 $150 $17 $15
Pierce 112 50 $117,800 $5,840 $4,138
San Juan 1 0 $0 $0 $0
Skagit 37 8 $8,300 $0 $0
Skamania 2 0 $0 $0 $0
Snohomish 87 16 $3,700 $33 $0
Spokane 92 13 $8,000 $500 $777
Stevens 0 1 $50 $0 $0
Thurston 32 7 $6,250 $20 $0
Walla Walla 6 1 $50 $0 $0
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 6
Arrests for
Applicable Convictions for Maximum Fees Fees
County Charges Applicable Charges Possible Fees Assessed Collected
Whatcom 18 5 $250 $0 $0
Whitman 0 0 $0 $0 $27
Yakima 35 9 $450 $130 $0
TOTAL 1011 239 $316,550 $223,295 $98,345
The total amount of potential fees is determined by calculating the convictions for each crime category. It is
worth noting that, in certain jurisdictions, the fees assessed exceed the maximum possible fees because the
maximum possible fees calculations only consider first offenses. Based on the courts' data, it is not known
how many cases are second, third or greater offenses. Therefore, in instances where the fee assessed is
greater than the maximum fee, we can assume some of the cases are second or more offenses. Also, in
instances where the fees collected exceed the fees assessed, these fees are being collected on assessments
from previous years.
Figure 1 illustrates the total amount of potential fees compared to the actual amount the courts levied.
Figure 1: Amounts Levied as a Percentage of Total Potential Fees
$900,000
$822,100
$780,959
$800,000
$700,000 $669,850
$645,900
$600,000
$507,550
$500,000 $474,350
$400,000 $369,307
$316,550
$300,000 $249,449 $252,592 $253,013 $257,496
$213,433 $223,395
$200,000
$100,000
$-
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Total Possible Fees Amount of Fees Levied
Sources: The Administrative Office of the Courts, Washington State Patrol, King County Superior Court, and Seattle Municipal Court.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 7
Background on Fees and Payments
Many people convicted of crimes do not pay fees all at once but instead, enter into payment plans with the
court. As they pay off the fees, court clerks code them into the Judicial Information System (JIS) and Odyssey
system most courts in Washington use. Therefore, revenue from fees can be greater during a given year than
the fees assessed, as offenders gradually pay off their penalties.
The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) is responsible for establishing new codes in JIS and Odyssey
and informing courts about which codes to use. AOC codes data in these systems to the fund account, rather
than the statute applicable to the crime. As a result, it is not possible to separate the funds collected by the
offense committed.
Once court clerks receive the revenue and allocate it to a code, the city or county treasurer is responsible for
establishing an account for the monies. Some cities contract with their county to act as treasurer for the
jurisdiction. Then, the jurisdiction must decide which department, office, or official is responsible for deciding
how to spend the funds, allocating the amounts according to the guidelines established by the Legislature, and
ensuring that the quarterly reports are sent to Commerce.
The Washington State Patrol (WSP) maintains data by county on the number of arrests and convictions for all
crimes in Washington. Some cities, notably Seattle, use municipal codes for misdemeanor offenses that
effectively replace the applicable state statute for that crime in the city's data system. Therefore, the
researchers for this report obtained data from the Seattle Municipal Court on arrests, cases, and convictions
for crimes committed within the city of Seattle.
Because the applicable crimes include both misdemeanors and felonies, the courts affected include municipal
and district courts (known as courts of limited jurisdiction, or CLJs) and superior courts, which hear serious
felonies.
Certain courts, including the Seattle Municipal Court, do not use JIS or Odyssey. Additionally, some municipal
courts contract with their county district courts to collect fees on their behalf. For instance, King County
District Court contracts with Beaux Arts, Bellevue, Burien, Carnation, Covington, Duvall, Kenmore, Redmond,
Sammamish, Shoreline, Skykomish, and Woodinville. The information on fees collected and assessed by those
cities is merged with King County District Court data.
Crime Rates
In state fiscal year 2020, law enforcement officers made 12% fewer arrests for sexual exploitation crimes
compared to state fiscal year 2019. There was a sharp decrease in the number of convictions between state
fiscal year 2019 (358) and state fiscal year 2020 (239), resulting in a 33% decrease.
Table 3 lists the number of arrests, cases, and convictions for these crimes. The table also includes the crime
of trafficking that carries an additional $10,000 penalty fee. However, the fee for trafficking is not subject to
the same dispersal as those specified under RCW 9.68A.105, RCW 9A.88.120, and RCW 9A.88.140.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 8
Table 3: Statewide Arrests and Convictions Per-Crime - State Fiscal Year 2020
Number of Number of
Statute Charge Arrests Convictions
9.68A.100 Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor (CSAM) 74 15
9.68A.101 Promoting Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor 20 4
9.68A.102 Promoting Travel for Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor 16 0
9.68A.103 Permitting Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor 0 0
9A.40.100 Trafficking 32 7
9A.88.010 Indecent Exposure 524 143
9A.88.030 Prostitution 64 9
9A.88.070 Promoting Prostitution in the First Degree 21 9
9A.88.080 Promoting Prostitution in the Second Degree 27 27
9A.88.085 Promoting Travel for Prostitution (Vehicle Impoundment) 0 0
9A.88.090 Permitting Prostitution 0 3
9A.88.110 Patronizing a Prostitute 233 22
Total 1,011 239
Source: The Washington State Patrol provided data on statewide arrests and convictions, and the Seattle Municipal Court provided data on arrests and
convictions within the city of Seattle.
The relatively high number of arrests for trafficking – 32 – compared to the seven convictions suggests that
many of these cases are instead prosecuted for the lesser charge of promoting prostitution. Also, if an
investigation reveals that the victim(s) was underage, the prosecutor may elect to press a felony charge of
CSAM instead of a trafficking charge. Finally, an arrest made in one year can lead to a case that takes more
than a year to prosecute and resolve, explaining why some charges have fewer arrests than convictions in
state fiscal year 2020.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 9
Figure 2: Statewide Totals of Arrests and Convictions - 2014 through 2020
1,600
1,439
1,400
1,282 1,294
1243
1,187
1,200 1,131
1,011
1,000
800
600
490
418 418
400 349 363 358
239
200
0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Number of arrests Number of convictions Linear (Number of arrests) Linear (Number of convictions)
Source: The Washington State Patrol provided data on statewide arrests and convictions, and the Seattle Municipal Court provided data on arrests and
convictions within the city of Seattle.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 10
How Jurisdictions Reported Expending the Funds
Overview
In state fiscal year 2020, 55 courts in Washington handed down convictions for the crimes that bear the
additional fee. Of these courts, 28 (51%) levied the statutorily required fees. Twenty-two courts levied and
collected revenue towards payment of the fees in state fiscal year 2020. An additional six courts collected
revenue in 2020 but did not assess fees, which indicates the revenue was from persons convicted of crimes
paying off fees levied in past years.
Thirteen courts reported $100 or less collected during state fiscal year 2020 and were not surveyed.
Researchers surveyed the 15 jurisdictions that collected greater amounts through email and phone contacts to
determine how cities and counties used the funds.
As in previous years, jurisdictions were provided with a chart (Appendix A) showing the relevant statutes and
the statutory dispersal formula for the funds.
In most cases, it was necessary to speak with another department (for instance, the city or county treasurer,
the police department, or the prosecutor's office) to learn whether the funds had been allocated and how they
had been spent.
Of the 15 courts contacted, 13 responded to the survey. The following information lists how each jurisdiction
described expending the funds.
Reports by Jurisdiction
Aberdeen Municipal Court
The city of Aberdeen has currently partnered with Beyond Survival in providing the organization slightly over
$300 in funds for a prostitution intervention that they will conduct in the future. The court administrator and a
finance clerk will work together in distributing these funds.
Auburn Municipal Court
In Auburn, funds allocated to the police department are rolled into the general budget. Using general budget
funds, the Auburn Special Investigation Unit completes various trainings and investigations with prostitution
emphasis during the year and completes after-action reports.
Chelan County District Court
In the past, this funding was expended through funding school resource officers. In 2020, local police
departments increased their school presence and assigned two school resource officers to dedicate most of
their time in Wenatchee schools. The school resource officers spend a considerable amount of time on the
prevention, training, and counseling of students and community members.
Des Moines Municipal Court
The Des Moines Municipal Court typically donates to the Genesis Project, a Seattle-based nonprofit
organization that assists survivors of sex trafficking. The court usually donates several hundred dollars during
October and November. It is unknown how the Des Moines Police Department spends its portion of these
funds.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 11
Federal Way Municipal Court
These funds are deposited into the city's general fund and directed to the Federal Way Police Department to
assist in dealing with prostitution and trafficking crimes.
King County District Court
King County District Court assessed and collected revenue on behalf of King County and its partner cities,
Auburn and Bellevue. Then, King County redistributes the appropriate funds back to its partner cities for the
cities to spend. The use of funds by Auburn is described above, and Bellevue did not respond to surveying.
Kent Municipal Court
Kent Municipal Court allocated 50% of the $30,000 in funds collected to Kent Youth and Family Services to
fund a Commercially Sexually Exploited Children (CSEC) advocate. The police department spent 48% of the
funds on sending officers and the CSEC advocate to the Western States Information Network Conference,
overtime costs for officers working the prostitution/john stings, and costs of technology used in prostitution
and trafficking-related operations.
Pierce County Superior Court
Pierce County used the criminal penalty fee funds to help fund enforcement of commercial sex laws through
actions such as internet child sexual predator stings, a web portal to identify people charged with sexual
crimes. The county also allocates some of these fee funds to the Family Justice Center to reduce and prevent
teen sexual violence.
SeaTac Municipal Court
The court has not yet spent these funds and states that they are currently in its general fund balance.
Seattle Municipal Court
Of the $5,000 collected in state fiscal year 2020, the Seattle Municipal Court allocated $3,000 to the city's
Prostitution Prevention Fund and $2,000 to the Sex Industry Victim Fund.
Spokane County Superior Court
The Spokane County Superior Court could not provide information on how the funds from state fiscal year
2020 were spent. When writing this report, the Spokane Court is currently transferring to a new financial
system, and the IT department is unable to fulfill a request for this information at this time.
Tukwila Municipal Court
The Tukwila Municipal Court spent over $20,000 of these funds for relevant police operations, including:
Local undercover operations to identify and correct pre-prostitution actions
Partnership with the Federal Bureau of Investigation to investigate the trafficking of minors
John-targeted Regional Undercover Operation
Local investigation into a Tukwila brothel
In-person verification of registered sex offender/kidnapper address
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 12
Appendix A: Distribution of Criminal Penalty Fees
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 13
Appendix B: Conviction and Fee Data by County
Table 4: Conviction, Fees Assessed and Fees Collected by Court
Fees Fees
Court County Convictions Assessed Collected
ABERDEEN MUNICIPAL COURT Grays Harbor 1 $1,517 $504
AUBURN MUNICIPAL COURT King 0 $3,100 $1,735
BELLEVUE MUNICIPAL COURT King 0 $12,500 $4,840
BELLINGHAM MUNICIPAL COURT Whatcom 4 $0 $0
BOTHELL MUNICIPAL COURT King 1 $0 $0
BREMERTON MUNICIPAL COURT Kitsap 1 $0 $0
CENTRALIA MUNICIPAL COURT Lewis 8 $50 $0
CHELAN COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Chelan 0 $1,500 $2,129
CLARK COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Clark 0 $0 $469
DES MOINES MUNICIPAL COURT King 4 $20,050 $5,650
ENUMCLAW MUNICIPAL COURT King 2 $0 $0
EVERETT MUNICIPAL COURT Snohomish 3 $0 $0
EVERGREEN DISTRICT COURT Snohomish 2 $0 $0
FEDERAL WAY MUNICIPAL COURT King 1 $0 $1,653
FIFE MUNICIPAL COURT Pierce 2 $0 $0
FRANKLIN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Franklin 4 $0 $0
GARFIELD COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Garfield 1 $0 $0
GRANT COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Grant 1 $0 $0
GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Grays Harbor 1 $0 $0
ISLAND COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Island 1 $0 $11
KENT MUNICIPAL COURT King 12 $62,800 $42,680
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 14
Fees Fees
Court County Convictions Assessed Collected
KING COUNTY DISTRICT COURT King 6 $100 $50
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT King 55 $109,339 $25,849
KIRKLAND MUNICIPAL COURT King 1 $0 $0
KITSAP COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Kitsap 6 $100 $39
KITSAP COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Kitsap 6 $100 $100
LAKEWOOD MUNICIPAL COURT Pierce 5 $0 $0
LEWIS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Lewis 1 $0 $0
LEWIS COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Lewis 3 $0 $0
LOWER KITTITAS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Kittitas 2 $0 $0
LYNNWOOD MUNICIPAL COURT Snohomish 4 $0 $0
MARYSVILLE MUNICIPAL COURT Snohomish 3 $0 $0
MASON COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Mason 1 $0 $0
MOUNT VERNON MUNICIPAL COURT Skagit 3 $0 $0
OKANOGAN COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Okanogan 3 $17 $15
OLYMPIA MUNICIPAL COURT Thurston 2 $0 $0
PIERCE COUNTY DISTRICT COURT NO 1 Pierce 5 $840 $0
PIERCE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE Pierce 1 $0 $0
PIERCE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Pierce 33 $5,000 $4,138
POULSBO MUNICIPAL COURT Kitsap 2 $100 $100
PUYALLUP MUNICIPAL COURT Pierce 3 $0 $0
RENTON MUNICIPAL COURT King 2 $0 $0
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL COURT King 2 $5,000 $5,000
SEATAC MUNICIPAL COURT King 0 $0 $430
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 15
Fees Fees
Court County Convictions Assessed Collected
SKAGIT COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Skagit 1 $0 $0
SKAGIT COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Skagit 4 $0 $0
SNOHOMISH COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Snohomish 1 $17 $0
SNOHOMISH COUNTY DISTRICT COURT EVERETT Snohomish 1 $17 $0
SNOHOMISH COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Snohomish 2 $0 $0
SPOKANE COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Spokane 4 $500 $50
SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Spokane 9 $0 $727
STEVENS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Stevens 1 $0 $0
TACOMA MUNICIPAL COURT Pierce 1 $0 $0
THURSTON COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Thurston 2 $20 $0
THURSTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Thurston 3 $0 $0
TUKWILA MUNICIPAL COURT King 1 $500 $2,150
WALLA WALLA COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Walla Walla 1 $0 $0
WHATCOM COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Whatcom 1 $0 $0
WHITMAN COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Whitman 0 $0 $27
YAKIMA COUNTY DISTRICT COURT Yakima 2 $0 $0
YAKIMA MUNICIPAL COURT Yakima 7 $130 $0
Total 51 Jurisdictions 239 $223,295 $98,345
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 16
Appendix C: King County's Approach
Most of the arrests and convictions for the crime of patronizing a prostitute (RCW 9A.88.110) and commercial
sexual abuse of a minor (RCW 9.68A.100) take place in King County. Several law enforcement agencies in King
County, including the city of Seattle, Kent, Bellevue, Des Moines, and Renton police departments, have policies
to actively pursue those who buy sexual encounters from adults or children.
In 2014, King County launched a new approach to reduce the demand for prostitution by working to change the
attitudes and behaviors of people arrested for patronization. Several law enforcement and prosecuting
agencies within King County have changed their emphasis to pursue commercial sex buyers and the people
who facilitate sex trafficking. This approach is based on the reality that past practices of arresting and
prosecuting people in prostitution were not making the community any safer. Rather, punishing prostituted
people resulted in the cycle of prostitution-related crime and sex trafficking persisting. Presently, law
enforcement and prosecuting agencies are instead focusing on punishing those who seek out and facilitate
the illegal interaction – the sex buyers, promoters, and traffickers.
Sex trafficking is a crime that disproportionately targets vulnerable youth across Washington state, including
victims of child sexual abuse or youth in the foster care system. The crime disproportionately harms youth
from marginalized racial backgrounds and sexual identities. Human traffickers and sex buyers exploit the
vulnerabilities of youth by involving them in the sex trade. Across the U.S., the typical age of entry of youth
being coerced into the sex trade is between 13 and 15 years old. In 2018, almost 200 youth between the ages
of 11 and 24 were referred to services for youth experiencing commercial sexual exploitation in King County.
Of those youth referred, 20% were between the ages of 11 and 14. These children and young adults experience
repeated rapes, abuse, and other forms of violence at the hands of sex buyers and traffickers.
All through the process, these trafficking victims face many barriers to escaping the life of prostitution.
Therefore, King County's approach emphasizes the prosecution of sex buyers and traffickers and connecting
prostituted people to services. Program leaders assert that a reduction in demand will decrease harm to
prostituted people, reduce buyers' self-destructive behaviors, and curb sex trafficking.
Over the past four years, the Ending Exploitation Collaborative (EEC) in King County marshaled a cross-sector
transformation toward diverting sexual exploitation victims to services and holding sex buyers accountable.
The EEC is a partnership of the Organization for Prostitution Survivors, the Washington State Attorney
General's Office, the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, Seattle Against Slavery, Businesses Ending
Slavery and Trafficking and the Center for Child and Youth Justice.
The EEC has changed norms and practices across sectors to confront the demand for commercial sex. For
example, traffickers and sex buyers in King County are being arrested and prosecuted through pioneering
approaches that have been recognized around the country. Following conviction, sex buyers in King County are
required to complete an innovative and successful education program called "Stopping Sexual Exploitation."
This program is based on social justice principles and personal transformation and is designed to help men
understand their behavior and promote their own decisions not to buy sex. A significant portion of the buyer
education program fees and the statutorily mandated fines assessed from buyers are directed to increase
services that help victims of sex trafficking and sexual exploitation, including housing, treatment, and
employment training.
The EEC also seeks to shift norms and practices by youth and adults through education and targeted
interventions because of its belief that broader cultural and institutional norms influence the individual choice
to buy sex. The EEC provides prevention education for youth in schools and adults at their places of work.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 17
Because research indicates that 13% of calls to solicit sex originate from local businesses, and a peak time to
solicit sex online is 2 p.m., employers have played an important role in educating employees and preventing
illegal activity through the workplace.
Figures 3 and 4 illustrate how King County's arrests and convictions, respectively, compare to the numbers in
the rest of the state.
Figure 3: Arrests for Patronization and Prostitution Crimes - SFY 2020
140 132
120
100
80
60
47
39
40
20 11
0
King County Remainder of State
Patronizing a Prostitute Prostitution
Figure 4: Convictions for Patronization and Prostitution Crimes - SFY 2020
18
16
16
14
12
10 9
8
6 5
4
2
0
0
King County Remainder of State
Patronizing a Prostitute Prostitution
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 18
File and source
- File
- 2020_criminal-penalty-fees-2020-report-1285ca00-6a29-4c29-9a44-bc26a39e4d57.pdf
- Size
- 1,152,066 bytes
- SHA-256
- fbd9087e4d33ead44728aaff263fad7cd46c61e48dc440af77669fc760387725
- Original
- app.leg.wa.gov