House Bill 819, also known as "Karen's Law," arose from the brutal slaying of 'Ewa Beach resident Karen Ertell. The trial won't take place until March, approaching two years after the murder.

That delay has fueled a great deal of the emotion surrounding HB 819. The measure, due for a vote tomorrow in the House Judiciary Committee, would eliminate the pre-trial hearing in Family Court and mandate that any 15- to 17-year-old charged with first- or second-degree murder be tried as an adult. No exceptions.

Ertell's family has understandably delivered evocative testimony about their protracted ordeal during pre-trial proceedings. No family should have to endure such suffering. However, this bill is not the answer. Enacting this hard-and-fast rule would not necessarily eliminate that painful delay, and it could deprive a future defendant of fair treatment.

In many cases, the defense makes a pre-trial argument that must be settled, whether the accused is a teen or an adult. For example, whether or not the defendant is fit to stand trial is a question that may take evaluations from mental health professionals — an involved, but necessary, process.

Even if Karen's Law passed and teen murder cases automatically skipped Family Court without a hearing, the court still has the duty to give defendants their due. Otherwise, convictions could be overturned, and no family suffering is avoided that way.

In the process of the trial, facts uncovered may support a lesser charge, but not murder, even if that seemed well-founded at first. Or, if the prosecution doesn't win its case, there can be acquittal.

In either of these instances, the privacy of Family Court proceedings, which protects the teen defendant, would have been unjustly sacrificed.

Judiciary spokesmen said nearly all petitions to waive Family Court jurisdiction have been granted, so it's evident that the most violent teen crimes already are being treated with appropriate severity, even without this law.

And without this law, judges still have the clear discretion to evaluate each accused teen as an individual.

That's how it should be. Teens, like anyone else accused of a crime, are innocent until proven guilty.