³ÉÈËXÕ¾

Washington lawmakers are considering a controversial new bill that could change the way the state treats people caught in internet sting operations.

(SB 5312), sponsored by a group of Democratic senators, aims to reduce the legal penalties for those convicted in “Net Nanny” operations — stings where law enforcement officers pose as minors to catch online predators.

Right now, people convicted in these operations face serious consequences, including long-term sex offender registration and extended community supervision.

SB 5312 would shorten those penalties in cases where no real child was involved, acknowledging the difference between someone targeting an actual minor and someone arrested in a setup.

What’s changing?

If passed, SB 5312 would do two major things. The first is reducing the length of sex offender registration. Instead of requiring offenders to register as sex offenders for an indefinite period, those caught in Net Nanny operations would only need to register for five years — provided they have no prior sex offense convictions.

The second is shortening community supervision. Currently, some sex offenses result in lifetime supervision, even if the person is released from prison early. The bill proposes capping supervision at three years for those arrested in Net Nanny stings, provided they have no history of predatory behavior.

More politics: Washington lawmakers push to keep ‘vehicular homes’ safe from tow yard

What are Net Nanny operations?

If you haven’t heard of them, Net Nanny operations are internet sting missions run by the Washington State Patrol’s (MECTF).

Officers pretend to be minors in online chat rooms, waiting for adults who try to engage in inappropriate conversations or arrange meetups.

Once an adult takes a concrete step toward committing a crime — like showing up at a meeting spot or continuing a conversation with explicit intent — they’re arrested and charged with an attempted sex offense.

Between 2015 and 2023, Washington’s Net Nanny operations led to 311 arrests across 20 sting operations. But despite these numbers, there’s debate over whether these stings actually prevent crime.

by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy noted that research on the effectiveness of internet sting operations is limited, leaving questions about whether they truly deter future offenses.

Why is bill being proposed?

Supporters of SB 5312 argue that someone caught in a Net Nanny sting — who never actually had contact with a real child — shouldn’t face the same lifelong consequences as someone who has committed a hands-on offense. They say the bill is about fairness and ensuring that punishments fit the crime.

took public testimony on the bill on Monday.

Bill sponsor Senator Lisa Wellman (D-Mercer Island) said the bill’s aim is to reduce lifetime supervision and registration for individuals convicted of non-contact, victimless sex offenses.

“It’s saying, with no prior record of any wrongdoing, with a child, with nothing on your computer, in your home, in your background, shouldn’t there come a time when you can live a life and know for certain that that time can come? It’s not a lifetime sentence,” Wellman said.

Bryan Glant told lawmakers he never abused a real child but served prison time following a Net Nanny sting. He said current laws have harsh consequences, including restrictions on education, employment, and travel.

“I cannot move home or visit most public spaces like a gym or fast-food restaurants and drive-thrus because a minor might be there,” he said. “All my private text messages, emails and internet searches will be surveilled with spy software for the rest of my life.”

Laura Harmon, a King County Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney and attorney for the statewide Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, defended the practice of law enforcement officers operating as children in sting operations.

“The fact that sometimes it is a real child and sometimes it is not does not change the fact that the person forms that intent and takes actions to sexually abuse that minor,” Harmon said.

Opponents, however, worry that reducing penalties could send the wrong message. Groups focused on child safety believe the possibility of severe consequences is what keeps potential predators from engaging in these behaviors in the first place.

Other news: Lawmakers push to make clergy mandatory reporters — Will this attempt finally succeed?

How do other states handle this?

Net Nanny-style stings aren’t unique to Washington — many other states, including Texas, California and Florida, use similar tactics to catch online predators. However, how those states handle sentencing varies widely.

Some states impose penalties just as severe as if a real child were involved, while others have started reviewing whether sentencing should be different when no actual victim exists.

As of now, comprehensive data comparing how each state penalizes fictitious victim cases is limited. What’s clear is that lawmakers across the country are starting to take a closer look at these types of cases, debating where the line should be drawn between punishment and rehabilitation.

Collin Wood told lawmakers he was arrested during a Net Nanny operation.

“Right now, the Net Nanny operation is regularly abusing their authority, manipulating evidence, lying to the public and the courts and even the legislature about how they operate. This is resulting in unlawful arrests and wrongful convictions,” he said.

The question now before lawmakers is: Should an internet sting operation carry the same weight as a real-world crime? Or should there be a distinction?

The committee has not set a date for a possible vote on this bill.

Matt Markovich often covers the state legislature and public policy for ³ÉÈËXÕ¾ Newsradio. You can read more of Matt’s stories here. Follow him on , or email him here.