 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
With all this Max Cliford, Rolf Harris stuff going on started to agree, that a statute of limitations might be appropriate in some types of case.
I'm not saying sexual assualt is one of the situations but...
Should people always be able to make hazy accusations about events that happened 20 or 30 years ago?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
A crime is a crime whenever it's reported.
Just because it was 20-30 years ago (or more) doesn't make it acceptable or any less real for the person it happened to.
Those that leave it that long however, have to accept that evidence and therefore a conviction are much less likely.
*Her* |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A crime is a crime whenever it's reported.
Just because it was 20-30 years ago (or more) doesn't make it acceptable or any less real for the person it happened to.
Those that leave it that long however, have to accept that evidence and therefore a conviction are much less likely.
*Her*"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago
Over the rainbow, under the bridge |
"A crime is a crime whenever it's reported.
Just because it was 20-30 years ago (or more) doesn't make it acceptable or any less real for the person it happened to.
Those that leave it that long however, have to accept that evidence and therefore a conviction are much less likely.
*Her*"
Also - many childhood sexual abuse cases only come to light when that child has become an adult as they are too scared or ashamed to tell anyone. They may have even tried in the past and not been believed. There are many reasons why people remain silent. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
