[Ask the Gulch] Should there be a statute of limitation on sexual harassment? It seems that when one charge is leveled, its followed by a deluge of "me too's", some of which happened years ago--especially when there might be a financial settlement in the offing.
Posted by preimert1 6 years, 5 months ago to Ask the Gulch
Major problems with too-short statutes of limitation for any claim are that they prevent actually knowing what the damages are and thereby encourage unnecessary litigation to preserve the ability to make a claim at all.
As a baseline clarification: The statute of limitations is a date by which a lawsuit must be started-- that lawsuit can carry on for years, even 10+ years in some circumstances. The lawsuit simply has to be started.
I'll break down some main problems with too-short SOLs:
(1) Knowledge of the injuries is a fundamental fact necessary to know how much money is needed to compensate for the injuries. (e.g., is someone facing long-term PTSD, or is it short-term difficulty/normal emotions and will pass in a year? Is a broken bone going to heal well, or will there be permanent limitation of use? the list goes on, and there's a dramatically different value to "temporary and healed well" versus "for the rest of my life." There can be no negotiation about the value of the claim without knowledge of the value of the claim, and it takes time to know the full extent of damages.
(2) Because the full damages take time to know, claimants won't be willing to settle until time has passed, likely more than the short statute of limitation. Thus, attorneys like me have to start lawsuits simply to preserve the claim. This burdens the courts, increases costs for everyone, and is completely unnecessary. In the current system, most civil claims do not ever start a lawsuit (i.e., they settle before starting a lawsuit). That's the best -- everyone talks through the facts and law and comes to a clear view of the risks/exposure, and reach a mutually acceptable resolution of the conflict without courts!
To further complicate things, many instances of abuse (sexual or not) are within relationships and it simply takes time to get people physically and legally separated (e.g. divorce fully finalized) to where it's safe to bring forward a civil claim for the damages.
Lots of issues, but wanted to shed some light.
EDIT: typos
I happen to think that the starlets who are complaining actually looked at the casting couch as the way to stardom, and did it willingly. If anyone should be upset, it should be the stockholders of the movie companies who may have been duped into thinking a starlet who gave into the casting couch was better than she was
Most women manage to go through life without following some old dude up to his hotel room in the middle of the night, and certainly don't subsequently invite him into their apartment later if they didn't like the outcome of the first encounter.
I have no doubt the guy is pond scum and a rapist and probably guilty of many of the accusations... but I'm equally distressed by how disgustingly low the morality of these people obviously is (victims and offender). If they kept to themselves, well then maybe, but they don't - they routinely declare conservatives to practically be the anti-christ.
Now, they want revenge even though he most likely gave them the parts and the deal was consummated.
Either file a complaint right within a few days, or move on and let it go
Someday in the future, a statute of limitation will be reasonable, but not now.
In the field of anthropology, about 3 years ago, a prominent anthropologist addressed a major conference. She did not talk about the digs she had recently been on (paleo anth.) but told about how the female grads and post grads doing field work were pressured into providing sex for their mentors as a prerequisite for good evaluations and advancement. The scalpel provided by this presentation lanced a boil of activity that went back generations. Lots of examples of this abuse subsequently came to light.
The women could not report 'within 7 years' because the system was set up to annihilate the reputations of anyone who did. It took a major change in social climate for even an established authority to make this the topic of her presentation at a conference. Had she done this a decade ago, the the character assassination we see in climate science would have destroyed her.
A similar thing is happening in Hollywood...only worse. We know that you have to bed the producer/director/lead in order for your acting abilities to even matter. Finally, this 'topic of Industry jokes' is being exposed to the light. Everyone who has been abused - and this again goes back generations - should be able to name their tormentors.
Even in less 'departmentalized' situations, women have been blamed for being victims of rape or assault - and it takes a long time for them to report it. This is getting better, now, but we still need to tackle the institutionalized variations
Give it another decade or two, preimert, then we can enact a statute of limitation and be on the side of good.
Jan
WRT the original question: I am not sure what good it does to make accusations so many years after the fact, especially if naming names. Someone has to have courage to bring it up (AND it needs to be attended to at the time) when it happens. I suppose now (I hope) that it has come to light, further accusations will either be unnecessary, or at least if necessary, effective.
The one thing, conspicuously missing from any of this, is PROOF.
Anyone else...it must be reported immeaditly with proof and except for rape or injury it would only carry a fine, order to get help, probation and a permanent mark on one's record with any extenuating circumstances which could be re-visited at any time when evidence can be.presented.
PLUSSSSSSSSSS....Jail time for anyone falsely reporting an offense.
My husband was an elementary school principal. One day the custodians came with a new door for office. It was solid wood. He made them take it away and order one with a very large glass panel. I wonder why!
This is a law that badly needs to be weakened, and protections for the accused made stronger. Certainly the statute of limitations is one of those. If a victim of SH doesn't formally complain within six months, she's probably making it up.
And statutes of limitations need to be kept (and shortened) even more for serious crimes such as rape and molestation, because "recovered memories" have been proven not to genuinely exist and because waiting years robs the accused of any ability to find witnesses and defend himself.
means "fart" en Espanol)
Power is the greatest seducer, and unlike the aforementioned actress, I feel certain many current complaining "victims" were simply those that "went on in" knowing what was expected, having expectations of their own, but also hoping they could dance around Harvey's expectations and still achieve their own. Most likely, that didn't often happen. Then years later when they looked back and felt that their expectations weren't met, and that they'd been fucked literally and figuratively, the incident went from being deception to being rape or assault. So I think there should be not only a statute of limitations, but also a statute stating claims made after the expiration of the SOL constitute automatic grounds for counterclaims of slander.
"...apprehension...of an imminent...offensive act" That seems to be a pretty low hurtle to jump over to make a claim. It seems to me that much of the problem is that women are now expected to meet multiple standards of sexuality with no real guideposts on how to balance their sexuality with their professional expectations, their romantic desires and their sense of morality. A romantic excursion turns bad and they feel taken advantage of and maybe even humiliated for letting themselves be seduced, And it is even more demoralizing when giving in to seduction, or to the ego inflating fuel of being desired by someone powerful, and then to later discover they'd been had, and all their romantic and/or career advancing expectations were false. It then becomes too easy to retrospectively seek retribution, especially if the seducer has already been called out by another "victim".
Years ago, men who did such things were written off as simply "cads", and women wrote it off as painful, sometimes embarrassing, and often ego bruising learning experiences. But they analyzed what they believed happened, realized there were signs that they missed and committed to themselves to be more careful and not be taken advantage of the next time. Not so much any more. Women are supposed to be equal to men in all respects, including being in the power position of the sexual initiators, and even the sexual aggressors. But when they're not, and are taken advantage of, they now feel doubly damned for having doubly failed for not having been in control and for letting themselves be taken advantage of, i.e. not scorned but doubly scorned. And you know how that saying goes...