BishopAccountability.org
	Extend, Don't Eliminate, the Statute of Limitations on Crimes from the Past By Robert G. Krebs The News Journal [Delaware] June 17, 2007 http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070617/OPINION09/706170303/1110/OPINION The Catholic Diocese of Wilmington supports changing Delaware's statute of limitations for lawsuits by victims of child sex abuse. Victims of child abuse are uniquely damaged, and typically require a very long time, many years into their adulthood, to come to grips with their abuse. Last year, the General Assembly agreed that the statute of limitations should be extended, from two years from the date of the abuse to 25 years after a victim turns 18, and the Diocese of Wilmington supported that change. The Diocese of Wilmington also supports the extension of the statute for future claims contained in S.B. 29 even though there are logical and legal reasons not to abolish the statute of limitations completely. But Senate Bill 29 not only abolishes the statute of limitations, it also opens a window allowing lawsuits to be filed at any time, regardless of when the abuse occurred. Under S.B. 29, lawsuits could be brought concerning events that occurred decades ago. There is no precedent, in Delaware or in any other state, for completely eliminating the statute of limitations, forward and backward. Statutes of limitations are designed to enable claims to be investigated and decided fairly, while facts are fresh, memories are vivid, and relevant evidence is still available. Limitations periods also guarantee that judges and juries will not be so far removed in time from the circumstances surrounding a case that they cannot interpret the evidence in light of those circumstances. S.B. 29 completely undermines these essential purposes of statutes of limitations. If S.B. 29 is to have some retroactive application, there are numerous ways to address these due process, fairness and other concerns. For example, to address the concern that key witnesses no longer may be available to testify, retroactivity could be limited to claims against the abuser only, as adopted last year by the state Senate. This would guarantee that the court would hear both the victim's and the alleged perpetrator's versions of what occurred. S.B. 29 does not provide this fundamental fairness. Another way to address concerns about S.B. 29 would be to limit its backward reach. S.B. 29 would permit lawsuits to be filed concerning alleged abuse any time in the past, regardless of whether the alleged abuser and other witnesses still are alive, or any records exist that can shed light on what occurred. Under Delaware's criminal law, sex offenses dating back to 1987 still can be prosecuted. Consistent with this limitation on criminal prosecutions, the look-back period of S.B. 29 could be limited to 1987. Even though this would permit lawsuits based on child sex abuse more than 20 years ago, such a limitation would make it much more likely that witnesses and relevant evidence still would be available. Finally, yet another way to address the problems created by lawsuits based on claims from long ago would be to create an alternative dispute resolution process for them, such as arbitration or mediation, with specific rules governing the proceedings, disclosure of relevant records, and damages awards. It has been suggested that S.B. 29 merely "opens the doors of the courthouse" for victims, and that their burden of proving old cases will be just as heavy as the burden of defending them. This argument ignores the fact that, regardless of what other witnesses and evidence may have been lost over time, in every case the victim will be available to testify, and that such testimony alone may be sufficient to enable the plaintiff to state a legal claim. In addition to having to defend without witnesses, and with little or no other evidence, those accused will have to bear the cost of defending the case, even if the claim ultimately is not proved. The Diocese of Wilmington is not alone in expressing these concerns about S.B. 29. Nonprofit agencies that provide child and youth services have voiced similar concerns about this legislation. Private schools, while supporting S.B. 29, have noted that victims of abuse in public schools are not afforded equal rights to sue and recover damages, and that not all institutions are held equally accountable for child sex abuse. Prominent medical groups have issued statements of concern about the bill. And a civil-rights organization has questioned the constitutionality of the unlimited retroactivity of S.B. 29. Because the diocese proposes to limit the backward reach of S.B. 29 to 1987, it fairly may be asked what we propose to do about victims of abuse prior to that date. For victims of sexual abuse by its priests, the Diocese of Wilmington will continue to do what it always has done: offer support, counseling, medical treatment and compensation to victims, regardless of when they were abused. There is no statute of limitations on any victim's request for help from the diocese. Regardless of Delaware's statute of limitations on lawsuits, the diocese pays the cost of treatment to help victims and, when victims have requested it, paid lump-sum settlements, including for the costs they have incurred, and will incur, for treatment related to their abuse. These payments have been made without regard to any legal obligation, and irrespective of whether the victim has filed a lawsuit or is in any way adversarial toward the diocese. Tragically, the Diocese of Wilmington has a lot of experience in reaching out and responding to victims of child sexual abuse, as well as addressing their legal claims, which is the focus of S.B. 29. As a religious organization with a very broad range of social services, educational and other ministries to sustain; as a charity with a duty of stewardship; and as the private institution with the greatest obligation to victims of child sex abuse, the Diocese of Wilmington also has an obligation to explain itself on the issue of legal redress for these victims. The Diocese of Wilmington is not looking for a pass on its legal obligation to victims, and the changes to S.B. 29 we propose will not shield the diocese from liability. What we are looking for is some recognition in the legislation of the legal and practical problems with an unlimited lookback provision. It seems to us that the needs and concerns of victims, of institutions and of Delaware's judicial system all can be addressed if there is some reasonable balancing of these needs and concerns, in the form of some reasonable limitations period on lawsuits based on child sex abuse. The bill also should be amended so that it affords the same rights to all victims, including those children served by public institutions, and that all institutions, public and private, are held equally accountable. But regardless of what happens with S.B. 29, the Diocese of Wilmington will continue to reach out to victims of abuse, and to do everything we can to make sure there are no more victims.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.