BishopAccountability.org
	Arizona Bill Would Lift Time Limit on Child-Sex Suits By Alia Beard Rau Arizona Republic April 6, 2010 http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/04/06/20100406arizona-sex-crimes-bill.html ARIZONA -- Arizona would join 44 other states in allowing adults who were sexually abused as children more time to sue their perpetrators under proposed legislation that passed the Senate on Monday. It still needs a vote of the full House before moving on to the Governor's Office and becoming law. Currently, victims of child sexual abuse in Arizona have until two years after their 18th birthday to file a lawsuit against their perpetrator. Under the proposed law, there would be no time limit for such a suit. In cases where the statute of limitations has ended, victims would have one year after the bill becomes law to sue. The proposed statute-of-limitations change was added as a last-minute amendment to House Bill 2699, which toughens penalties for engaging in prostitution with a minor and eliminates the legal argument that a suspect did not know the age of the minor. Sen. Amanda Aguirre, D-Yuma, had proposed the statute-of-limitations change as its own bill. Senate Bill 1292 was passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee but was not given a hearing in the Senate Rules Committee. Aguirre said she proposed the measure as an amendment to give it a chance at a vote of the full Senate. "We need to send a strong message that Arizona is not going to put up with pedophiles," she said. While lobbyists and lawmakers said they support tougher laws against perpetrators, they worried that the proposed law would have "unintended consequences" for third parties such as churches and employers. Sen. Chuck Gray, R-Mesa, fought the amendment but in the end voted for the bill. He said that because the proposal was added as an amendment, it did not go through the Legislature's full public-hearing process. "We have checks and balances in this system for a reason, so we can make sure that when we pass laws relative to someone's freedom or their property, we protect everyone in a way that's just," Gray said. Jack LaSota, lobbyist for the non-profit public-school insurance group Arizona School Risk Retention Trust, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. "I have no problem with instances when an employer ignored warning signs or brushed them off," LaSota said. "I do have a problem with the notion that just because one worked for a school district 25 years ago that employer is capable of being sued in the same cause of action as the perpetrator." Sen. John Huppenthal, R-Chandler, said he was concerned that it would turn these cases into "fishing expeditions" by individuals who were not victims of sexual abuse and create new victims out of those they falsely accuse. "The Catholic Church is extraordinarily susceptible to these lawsuits because of its financial structure," he said. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix offices are closed this week, and representatives could not be reached for comment. Wording was changed in this latest version to specify that third parties such as employers could be sued under the proposal only if they were directly negligent or involved in intentional conduct. Huppenthal also questioned the legitimacy of "the repressed-memory phenomena" in cases in which victims don't remember instances of abuse until many years later. "Memories can be created in people that were as realistic as though they were actually lived and yet they never happened at all," he said. The bill also now would require a victim to get a notarized statement from a licensed psychologist or behavioral-health professional stating that he or she believes that the individual has been a victim of a sexual offense.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.