BOSTON (MA)
Boston Globe
September 11, 2024
Eliminating the statute of limitations in civil cases could deter institutions like universities or churches from covering up for the criminals among them.
Sometimes the political is personal.
In the case of Senator Joan Lovely, her efforts to eliminate the statute of limitations for survivors of child sexual abuse in civil cases have their roots in her own childhood trauma. She has spoken openly about being abused at age 6.
And so when her bill was up for a final vote in the Senate in July — after 10 years of effort — she wept.
“It’s usually much later in life that someone will get up the courage to face their abuse,” Lovely told the Globe editorial board. “Usually [survivors] bury this. I know I did. So there shouldn’t be any reason for anyone not to be able to bring a case then.”
They could be allowed to do just that, if the House, which last month gave its initial approval to the bill, now goes along and gives final approval to the measure — yes, even during these days when informal sessions and generally noncontroversial items are the rule. It would certainly be one small way this Legislature, which has generally made a hash of its responsibilities, might redeem itself.
Lovely, during her speech on the Senate floor on the last day of formal sessions, provided a poignant reminder that the victims of childhood sexual abuse aren’t strangers to us. They are neighbors and colleagues.
They are people like Joe Kriesberg, president and CEO of MassINC and long an active participant in Boston’s civic community. Kriesberg told his story to the Globe editorial board last winter, when the man he said abused him, a former guidance counselor and coach, was sentenced for molesting nine boys at Camp Greylock in the Berkshires in the 1970s.
And while the man he said abused him could be prosecuted for his alleged crimes in Massachusetts, he could not be sued by those he allegedly abused because of this state’s statute of limitations. Some of the survivors are instead suing under New York state law, where the camp’s corporate headquarters were located.
“It’s unfortunate that Massachusetts hasn’t taken the lead on this and is following other states like Maine and Vermont, which have already eliminated the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse in civil cases,” said Mitchell Garabedian, who has represented hundreds of survivors of child sexual abuse, including those molested by priests in the Boston Archdiocese.
Opponents of the bill, should they actually surface in this case, are likely to fall back on the argument that over time evidence disappears and cases get more difficult to pursue, Garabedian noted, adding, “But this works perfectly fine in murder cases. There’s no statute of limitation on murder, and there’s no reason it would work any differently in these cases.”
Thus far, according to Lovely, 19 states already agree with that premise and have eliminated their statute of limitations.
Under current Massachusetts law, victims can file suit within 35 years after the alleged abuse and the legal clock does not start until a minor victim turns 18. Even that law dates only to 2014. Before that victims had only three years after they turned 18 to pursue a civil case.
Under Lovely’s bill a case could be brought not only against the alleged abuser but also against “any entity or individual that employed or supervised the person who allegedly committed the sexual abuse.”
And sure, that relates to compensation, but as Garabedian put it, “Compensation represents validation that the sexual abuse was not the victim’s fault.”
“And it may also serve as a deterrent, not just to abusers, but to the institutions that were involved in the cover-up,” he added.
As Lovely noted during her remarks on the Senate floor, “What was the magic number of 53? [35 plus 18] I couldn’t find that answer.” In fact, she said Tuesday, the average age to report is 48 to 52.
The Massachusetts law certainly isn’t “magic” to those abused in the 1970s at Camp Greylock, who are still fighting for justice.
“I’ve heard from thousands over the past decade who want to change the law,” she added. “I’m not doing this alone.”
The fact that the Senate passed this legislation on July 31, in the waning moments of formal sessions for the year, didn’t exactly allow the House to act in a timely fashion. But we have also seen in the past several weeks how lawmakers — when they choose to — can reach agreement on bills impacting long-term care facilities and maternal health. Surely a bill aimed at deterring and punishing child sexual abuse ought to be in that must-pass category.