How the fuck is there a statute of limitations for rape in New York?

[Tiberius]

The problem is who gets to say the findings are inconclusive? I understand DNA evidence can sometimes be finicky, but sometimes it's not. It's the job of an independent lab to analyze the DNA and make statements of fact. The prosecution can then make an argument based on the statements, and the defense can try and cast doubt. That's the ideal anyway.

So in my opinion, if the DNA from the rape kit gets a match, even 20 years later, there should be at the very least an investigation. Maybe the investigation will turn up nothing; maybe they'll do some in depth analysis and find nothing, maybe the DNA was from the woman's partner at the time who she says wasn't the rapist, but maybe they'll find that the DNA belongs to a guy who was known to live near the area where the rape occurred, etc. You won't know these things until you investigate. I don't think that there should be any crime for which people should escape justice.

[The Grand Nudger]

Quite right.  But, again, the existence of SOL's is not to help the guilty escape justice.  That must happen, sometimes, but again..our system (purportedly) errs on the side of innocence. That...is the purpose of SOLs.

If I -could- charge you, 20 years from now, on the basis of a bloody glove...dna inconclusive. I would. But should I be able to? Don't imagine the best case scenario, the most damning evidence, that almost never occurs in such a distant crime. It's the tenuous case, the state-sanctioned witch hunt...that we seek to avoid.

[Minimalist]

On the one hand - given his tape this was hardly a wrinkle on the news -

http://uproxx.com/news/judge-orders-dona...e-lawsuit/

A Federal Judge Orders The Child Rape Case Against Donald Trump To Move Forward

but the bigger answer to your question is:

THE MOTHERFUCKING CATHOLIC CHURCH OPPOSED THE LAW TO CHANGE IT.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics...-1.2680722

Catholic League President celebrates defeat of Child Victims Act, says bill was pushed by activists 'out to rape the Catholic Church'

Because, catholics like raping little kids.

[Pat Mustard]

How would you prove a rape, five years after the fact?  Think practically.

@Summer- probably not an example of rape culture, this specific instance.

I give you Fr Brendan Smyth. He was convicted thirty years after his earliest known rapes. It is quite possible for a conviction many years after the offence in the case of rape.

[The Grand Nudger]

........?

[KevinM1]

My father was thrown in prison in 2001 (arrested in 2000, trial was June 2001) for molesting my cousin in the 1980s.  Barely made the SOL.  No DNA evidence (she was a child, and kept quiet for all those years because she knew we needed his paycheck to help with my medical bills... the realization of that hit me very hard, and messed me up for a few years).  What locked him away was consistent testimony.  She had told her boyfriends - one of whom testified under oath in the trial about it - and the dates of her relationship with him sealed it.

You see, my father was a terrible person.  Abusive.  Physically to my oldest brother and my mom for a bit, emotionally to everyone after the middle brother was born.  We were all pieces of shit to him.  Enemies.  He tried burning our house down with us in it when I was 2 or 3.  He was into sick shit, like kiddie porn and bestiality.  He used to trade stuff with the guys at work.  He used to rant and rave about every little thing.  Our home was a prison.  Weekends were punishments.  I was that rare kid who loved going to school because it was safe and generally positive.

So, when he was on the stand, he tried doing the old "God, country, family" BS routine because he was, technically, a Vietnam vet.  He had worked in theater on various airplanes, as far from the fighting as one could be while still considered in Asia.  And, naturally, he only had consensual sex with my cousin magically at the time when she was considered legal, and that it was her fault for tempting him, and he made a mistake, etc. etc.

Of course, none of that flew with the DA, jury, or even judge, who didn't take kindly to him attempting to defend his character by wrapping himself in the flag.  Especially after her ex-boyfriend testified and the math didn't work out.  And after the harrowing, disturbing detail she provided.  And, for us, knowing things (that weren't admissible as evidence due to the SOL) like her wetting her bed frequently when she was 8 years old and other things.

So, yeah, I'm all for the SOL being lifted completely for things like this because NH's SOL range allowed us to put a monster away for ~14 years or so, and helped right a wrong that should never have happened to begin with.

Fun fact: my brothers and I all legally changed our last names to our mother's maiden name (and she's obviously divorced from him) because fuck him, and fuck his family (who, like his cousin Bill, are abusers and rapists and assholes too).  His name will not be passed on by us.

And, in case you think I'm full of shit, here he is: http://business.nh.gov/NSOR/Display.aspx...derID=6140

Those 16 counts are for the last year he abused her.  Because of the SOL, we couldn't get him on all the others.  But, he abused her from the age of 8 to 16.  He got off lightly, IMO, but at least we got him.  And at least he will never truly be free again.

[abaris]

In my country there's a statute of limitations for every crime, except homicide. And that has been introduced sometimes in the mid 60ies to make it possible to prosecute war criminals indefinetely.

Also I guess it would be very hard to prove a rape taking place, decades after the alleged crime, if no immediate action has been taken. As opposed to murder where new evidence and new forensic methods could still reveil the perpertrator.

[KevinM1]

RE: what I wrote above -

Fuck Trump, and fuck those that defend him. Fuck those that are complicit in promoting and defending rape culture, like the fucking idiots who try to compare Trump's comments to 50 Shades of Grey implying that, deep down, women love this shit. Fuck those who insult men by saying "That's just how guys talk. Boys will be boys." No, fuck that, I've never talked like that - bragging about doing things to women without their consent and preying on married women. Fuck those that want to shy away from calling his own description of his own actions for what it is - sexual abuse. Fuck that fucking worm for calling his own daughter a hot piece of ass on national radio. Fuck him and everyone who thinks like him.

[The Grand Nudger]

Amen. I've never bragged that women, deep down, love -that- shit.  In case of point...I'm pretty sure they don't.  Even if some of my fellow men believe they do, and act accordingly....like the trumpster has.

[Thumpalumpacus]

 Though..one wonders how a longer sol would be applied to a case without such evidence, or when such evidence is inconclusive?

I'd imagine that would devolve upon a prosecutor's assessment of the evidence in light of being able to persuade a jury or judge. Usually, prosecutors don't pursue cases where the evidence isn't airtight, because the District Attorney in most American counties is elected, not appointed, and that means success rate (in prosecutions) becomes a campaign issue.

Should we be able bring someone up, 20 years later, on rape charges... over inconclusive dna findings?  Pretty easy to get inconclusive dna findings, twenty years later.  We do it today, with -some- success, on more recent accusations.  Basically using the findings as a pretext to put someones character on trial.

It's certainly a danger of longer SOLs, but considering the political ramifications mentioned above, it seems to me more just to give justice late rather than give the perpetrator a free pass if he's able to lay low long enough.