Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    22 Jun '17 10:221 edit
    YouTube

    Samantha Bee found a fun piece of legislation that has been blocked for eleven years. In New York you have to file a claim for child abuse by age 23. The Child Victims Act seeks to raise that age to 28 for criminal cases and 50 for civil cases. Does allowing victims of child abuse 5 more years to file a claim for the crime that happened to them sound reasonable? The Catholic League and Boy scouts of america (among others) don't think so.

    The catholic conference spent more than 2.1 million dollars from 2007 to 2015 to lobby against the Child Victims Act. Good job on acting against stereotypes, Catholic Church
  2. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10113
    22 Jun '17 15:28
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNKPVAlp_jc

    Samantha Bee found a fun piece of legislation that has been blocked for eleven years. In New York you have to file a claim for child abuse by age 23. The Child Victims Act seeks to raise that age to 28 for criminal cases and 50 for civil cases. Does allowing victims of child abuse 5 more years to file a claim ...[text shortened]... to lobby against the Child Victims Act. Good job on acting against stereotypes, Catholic Church
    The Pope is too busy giving sermons on global warming and not building walls to be bothered
  3. Joined
    11 Oct '04
    Moves
    5232
    22 Jun '17 15:323 edits
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNKPVAlp_jc

    Samantha Bee found a fun piece of legislation that has been blocked for eleven years. In New York you have to file a claim for child abuse by age 23. The Child Victims Act seeks to raise that age to 28 for criminal cases and 50 for civil cases. Does allowing victims of child abuse 5 more years to file a claim ...[text shortened]... to lobby against the Child Victims Act. Good job on acting against stereotypes, Catholic Church
    Why should there be any time limitation in prosecuting a crime?

    I don't think there is any in the UK.
  4. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10113
    22 Jun '17 15:47
    Originally posted by Rank outsider
    Why should there be any time limitation in prosecuting a crime?

    I don't think there is any in the UK.
    Sorry but you waited too long to respond to this post. It must be deleted.
  5. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    22 Jun '17 16:43
    Originally posted by Rank outsider
    Why should there be any time limitation in prosecuting a crime?

    I don't think there is any in the UK.
    there shouldn't in my opinion. but here is just the american way of doing things, one minuscule step at a time because it's just not realistic to solve a problem all the way, it has to be done in baby steps.

    in this case, 28 is still better than 23. 28 means a young adult has had 5 more years of dealing with his trauma and deciding whether he should bring to light the ordeal he was through. 5 more years to get the support he needs to work up the nerve to relive all that crap.
  6. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55781
    22 Jun '17 18:33
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNKPVAlp_jc

    Samantha Bee found a fun piece of legislation that has been blocked for eleven years. In New York you have to file a claim for child abuse by age 23. The Child Victims Act seeks to raise that age to 28 for criminal cases and 50 for civil cases. Does allowing victims of child abuse 5 more years to file a claim ...[text shortened]... to lobby against the Child Victims Act. Good job on acting against stereotypes, Catholic Church
    There should be limits to protect the defendant. As time passes it is harder to get witnesses and other evidence to disprove a claim. Too often on this site, people are only concerned with possible valid claims not being litigated but it is at least equally important to prevent wrongful convictions.
  7. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    22 Jun '17 18:571 edit
    Originally posted by Rank outsider to Zahlanzi
    Why should there be any time limitation in prosecuting a crime?
    I don't think there is any in the UK.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitation_periods_in_the_UK

    "Unlike other European countries, the UK has no statute of limitations applying to serious sexual crimes."

    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33482619

    "The US-UK divide on sex cases."

    "Indeed statutes of limitations do exist in the UK for minor criminal cases and in many civil claims.
    In the field of sexual offences, there is one limitation - for "unlawful sexual intercourse" offences
    that took place between 1956 and 2004. This refers to cases of supposedly consensual
    sex with children between the ages of 13 and 15, where a case must have been brought
    within a year. Historical cases of this offence therefore cannot be prosecuted now.
    Despite the UK's general lack of statutory limitations on prosecuting historical sexual
    abuse cases, many were still dropped before trial, says criminal barrister Kama Melly."

    Here's an opinion from 'The Spectator', a right-wing British magazine:
    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/02/britain-needs-statute-limitations-sex-offences/#

    "Britain needs a statute of limitations for sex offences."
    --Ross Clark

    "Authorities have all but given up pursuing terrorist murders back in the 1970s, with old
    IRA men sent comfort letters assuring them they no longer face prosecution. How bizarre
    that placing an uninvited hand on someone’s knee can now be effectively treated as a
    more serious matter than blowing their head off with Semtex."
  8. Joined
    11 Oct '04
    Moves
    5232
    22 Jun '17 19:221 edit
    Originally posted by quackquack
    There should be limits to protect the defendant. As time passes it is harder to get witnesses and other evidence to disprove a claim. Too often on this site, people are only concerned with possible valid claims not being litigated but it is at least equally important to prevent wrongful convictions.
    What a load of nonsense.

    Under U.K. prosecution guidelines, the CPS will not bring any prosecution unless there is a reasonable prospect of a conviction. In considering this, they will take into account the passage of time, the reliability and availability of witnesses and make a judgement as to whether to proceed. The court will do the same if the case makes it to court.

    So if, as you say, the passage of time means the evidence is not sufficient, the case will either not be brought or a not guilty verdict should be returned.

    There is no need for the defendant to 'disprove a claim' as it is for the other side to prove theirs beyond a reasonable doubt.

    If, however, new evidence comes to light which proves someone's guilt (e.g. DNA testing) then why on earth should the mere passing of time protect a child abuser?
  9. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    22 Jun '17 20:22
    Originally posted by quackquack
    There should be limits to protect the defendant. As time passes it is harder to get witnesses and other evidence to disprove a claim. Too often on this site, people are only concerned with possible valid claims not being litigated but it is at least equally important to prevent wrongful convictions.
    "There should be limits to protect the defendant."
    the law protects the defendant. due process protects the defendant. not the fact that the victim was too traumatized to press charges

    " As time passes it is harder to get witnesses and other evidence to disprove a claim."
    if no evidence is presented, the case is dismissed.

    "Too often on this site, people are only concerned with possible valid claims not being litigated but it is at least equally important to prevent wrongful convictions"
    not by preventing an investigation from even occurring. reporting a rape doesn't mean the defendant is as good as convicted.
  10. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55781
    22 Jun '17 20:36
    Originally posted by Rank outsider
    What a load of nonsense.

    Under U.K. prosecution guidelines, the CPS will not bring any prosecution unless there is a reasonable prospect of a conviction. In considering this, they will take into account the passage of time, the reliability and availability of witnesses and make a judgement as to whether to proceed. The court will do the same if the ...[text shortened]... ilt (e.g. DNA testing) then why on earth should the mere passing of time protect a child abuser?
    Actually, what you are saying is a load of nonsense. The fact that an alleged victim cannot be bothered to make a claim in a timely manner is indeed a statement on the validity of the claim. People accused of a crime need to put up a defense. Memories fade, people die, relationships change and alleged victims shouldn't be able to wait decades to make a case because a complainant for strategic reasons decides to wait for physical conditions of scenes to change, people to die and witness to die or otherwise become unavailable.
  11. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55781
    22 Jun '17 20:38
    Originally posted by Rank outsider
    What a load of nonsense.

    Under U.K. prosecution guidelines, the CPS will not bring any prosecution unless there is a reasonable prospect of a conviction. In considering this, they will take into account the passage of time, the reliability and availability of witnesses and make a judgement as to whether to proceed. The court will do the same if the ...[text shortened]... ilt (e.g. DNA testing) then why on earth should the mere passing of time protect a child abuser?
    You cannot rely on a prosecutor to protect the rights of the defendant. Prosecutors want convictions. Defense attorney, juries and laws which provide protections including statutes of limitations protect defendants.
  12. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    22 Jun '17 20:47
    Originally posted by quackquack
    Actually, what you are saying is a load of nonsense. The fact that an alleged victim cannot be bothered to make a claim in a timely manner is indeed a statement on the validity of the claim. People accused of a crime need to put up a defense. Memories fade, people die, relationships change and alleged victims shouldn't be able to wait decades to make ...[text shortened]... onditions of scenes to change, people to die and witness to die or otherwise become unavailable.
    "The fact that an alleged victim cannot be bothered"
    go love yourself, you insensitive prick
  13. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55781
    22 Jun '17 21:22
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    "The fact that an alleged victim cannot be bothered"
    go love yourself, you insensitive prick
    Whether you like it or not. when the alleged victim fails to make a complaint in a timely manner you are trampling on the rights of the accused. This absolutely needs to be prevented and makes statutes of limitations essential. Perhaps you don't understand the need for time limitation or perhaps you don't mind trampling on defendant's rights but even an ignorant moron like yourself could understand the purpose of a law rather than use name when a person correctly points out your ignorance.
  14. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    22 Jun '17 22:26
    Originally posted by quackquack
    Whether you like it or not. when the alleged victim fails to make a complaint in a timely manner you are trampling on the rights of the accused. This absolutely needs to be prevented and makes statutes of limitations essential. Perhaps you don't understand the need for time limitation or perhaps you don't mind trampling on defendant's rights but even ...[text shortened]... and the purpose of a law rather than use name when a person correctly points out your ignorance.
    Did you go love yourself, you insensitive prick?
    What the hell do you know about trauma? About the fear of reliving that event? About gathering the courage to move on?
    You don't get to tell rape victims when the right time is to report their abuse.
  15. Joined
    05 Sep '08
    Moves
    55781
    23 Jun '17 00:10
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    Did you go love yourself, you insensitive prick?
    What the hell do you know about trauma? About the fear of reliving that event? About gathering the courage to move on?
    You don't get to tell rape victims when the right time is to report their abuse.
    Your a complete moron. Justice has nothing to do with the trauma of the alleged victim. If you can't be bothered to make a complaint in a timely manner you effect the rights of the defendant. Statute of limitation recognize this reality (even if you are too dumb to understand) and rightly ban causes of actions.
Back to Top