Re: Catholic Church reverses course on bill to eliminate statute of limitations on sex abuse of minors

On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Mike Findlay wrote:

>>> In the same way that justice requires the accuser, (or one acting on 
>>> the accuser's behalf in the context of crime), bear the burden of 
>>> proof, justice also requires a statute of limitations.
>>
>> How so?
>
> Because of the burden of proof.  Realistically the longer it takes to 
> bring charged the less evidence remains, and the very real probability 
> that the only evidence that will remain, if there is no cut off point, 
> is the word of the accuser.

I certainly appreciate *that* point, though in this digital age, I wonder 
how true this is any more.  Lots of things have vanished from the web over 
the years, yes, but lots of things *haven't*, too.

> Abuse charges are such all it takes is an allegation to destroy 
> someone's life and in a very real sense those charged with it already 
> bear the burden of proving their innocence.

But what does a statute of limitations have to do with this?  Would my 
bishop's life be any less ruined if the possibility of charging him with a 
*criminal* offense were no longer a possibility?  Would not the accusation 
itself still carry the sort of sting that would require him to step down 
from his position, etc., etc.?  (Well, perhaps not; if officers of the law 
were no longer required to pay attention to the allegations -- if, indeed, 
they were *forbidden* by law from paying attention to such old allegations 
-- then perhaps no one would come forward to make those allegations in the 
first place.  And perhaps the bishop would not have stepped down even if 
the allegations *had* been made, because there would be no option of 
saying, "I am going to step aside and let the authorities sort this out.")

> I think** a fair statute of limitations for abuse claims is adulthood 
> plus whatever the current statute of limitations is so that if the 
> statute of limitation for a sexual assault is 6 years, once a child 
> reaches adult hood they would have 6 years from the date of majority to 
> legally bring their allegations.

That sounds fair, to me.  (I might or might not quibble with the number -- 
just as I would note that "adulthood" is defined differently in different 
regions -- but the principle you're applying sounds good, to me.)

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot