Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
    Obviously when a charge is not filed immediately, the victim has made the decision that the advantages of NOT filing a charge outweigh the benefits of filing the charge. I would say the statute of limitations on filing should be very small, like 2 weeks. Plus, the actual offenses need to be significant, like rape or some sort of physical danger. Getting patted on the butt should NOT qualify for 'sexual harrassment". Any normal person can easily reject this sort of behavior quite easily and permanently by a nicely put, but firm, rebuttal.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CarrieAnneJD 2 years, 11 months ago
      As an attorney who represents victims of sex abuse, rape, assault, etc.:

      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.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
        It seems that the long statute of limitations is more to feather the nests of the lawyers by encouraging "victims" that they have rights they can sue over sometimes 30 years later. This is just stupid. Getting patted on the butt is something the "victims" should just GET OVER.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CarrieAnneJD 2 years, 11 months ago
          Not sure where you're getting 30 years from. Most statutes of limitations for civil damages are less than 10 years. In Minnesota, for most things it's 6 years. For intentional torts like assault it's 2 or 3 years. Only exception to that is because of the huge priest/child sex abuse scandal, the Minnesota legislature suspended the SOL for a few years and said adult victims of child abuse had until the fall of 2016 to start lawsuits, but now we're back to the normal 2 or 3 year limitation period. Of course, that doesn't stop someone from talking about it 30 years after the fact, but a civil claim for damages would be loooooooong expired.

          EDIT: typos
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
            my understanding is that there is NO statute of limitations in california for sex "crimes". Thats why they are going whole hog against Weinstein and Kevin Spacey.

            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
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CarrieAnneJD 2 years, 11 months ago
              Though as far as the Hollywood claims go, I'm inclined to agree with you. If the women willingly traded sex for an opportunity, then it's "her body, her choice." If it was forced, then not so much. This is all imo from a moral standpoint, though. Legally, there's no sex allowed for workplace advancement, etc.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CarrieAnneJD 2 years, 11 months ago
              I would be shocked if there were no limitations on the civil claims. I did hear that the suspended SOLs for prosecuting rape cases, but that's only criminal and has to be rape (i.e., if the state could charge someone with a crime at any point), but I'd bet the civil claim falls off. Even in Cali, it sounds odd to me to have NO limit for civil claims.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
                I think we will get to see with the cases in Hollywood that are brewing
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by CarrieAnneJD 2 years, 11 months ago
                  For California, yes. SOLs for non-federal claims are based on state law though, so it varies wildly across the country.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
                    Weinstein is toast as is spacey. Both were Hillary supporters so I say “live by the sword, die by the sword”. I never am in a room alone with a woman or child. Too dangerous in this culture. I try not to interact with black entitled people or any entitled women with children. It’s a sad situation that human touch of any type other than shaking hands is an invitation to legal trouble
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 2 years, 11 months ago
    All crimes should be treated equally with a reasonable length of statute of limitations, with the exception of murder. And, each crime should be defined BEFORE the event (as it is in on-sex related cases) because "sexual harassment" means different things to different people.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 2 years, 11 months ago
      That's one of the huge problems with sexual harassment - it is so amorphous.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
        There is physical harrassment, such as rape or attack. Then there is cat calling, patting on the backside, etc. These things can be easily rebuffed by a few choice words which make the perp stop or feel like a creep. I dont think there should be any penalty for approaching others and asking in one way or another to have sex.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by lrshultis 2 years, 11 months ago
          Unless physical force is done, decide whether to lose job or acquaintance but recall that humans a sexual creatures as Marilyn Monroe once stated. I have never been one who pressures in relationships and so have had very few of them which in afterthought was best for me.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by walkabout 2 years, 11 months ago
    "harassment" is not a crime. Assault, battery, rape, sodomy etc. are crimes. It seems showing interest in someone is now considered harassment. If party A is interested in Party B and they convey that interest and Party B TELLS party A they do not reciprocate that interest that should end it. Too often -- esp. in the workplace -- Party B does not clearly state "thanks, but no thanks" so party A continues to show interest. Then, much later, formal charges are brought. Attempting to prostitute someone IS a crime and should be immediately reported (e.g. movie producer X promises to make Actore Q a statr if s/he will only perform some physical act upon or at the direction of Movie mogul X that is a crime -- though a reasonable "statute of limitation " should exist (what is the statute of limiation for pimping?))
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
      Women, and even men now, are pricing themselves out of the market because of the fear of real or imagined charges of sexual harassment which can be levied like 30 years later !!! I would rather NOT hire women for this reason alone, and I would never permit myself to be in the same room alone with one for any reason without someone else there to witness things, or have a video recording of it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by GaryL 2 years, 11 months ago
    How about we charge all these aspiring actresses who Weinstein allegedly sexually assaulted but also gave them movie parts with Prostitution. It should not take a rocket scientist to figure out these gals shut up for long periods of time because they got something of value in trade.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by scojohnson 2 years, 11 months ago
      It is particularly entertaining to look at the account of a few of them, which in general summarize "he raped me after I followed him up to his hotel room in the middle of the night for a [casting couch] 'meeting'." And 2 months later, it happens again when they invited him in for a night cap to their own apartment. (or similar or variation of that account). Really?

      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.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by NealS 2 years, 11 months ago
        Yes, sometimes it's actually prostitution, especially the third or fourth time around. Sometimes it's all about money, power, and fame. After the money, power and fame are achieved their perceptions change and they attack. But then too it's a change in attitude and perception of everyone over the years. Remember when "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn", was taboo? If a prostitute changes her mind can it become rape? Yes there are predators out there, and I believe Harvey is one of them.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jdg 2 years, 11 months ago
      Prostitution ought not be a crime -- but you're certainly right that these women were engaged in it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 2 years, 11 months ago
        Agreed. not a crime if entered into of her own free will she has reached the age of consent (not by statute, but conscient). A person can make a living using their hands, their looks, their minds--so why not their gonads? Your body is yours.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by GaryL 2 years, 11 months ago
        No doubt that Weinstein was and is a Whore Master dog and lower than whale shit at the bottom of the deepest ocean. The issue as I see it is he was capable of paying the price for what ever he got. All of this "After the Act" crying years later is nothing more than horse road apples. Rape me once and shame on you. Rape me twice and shame on me. Said another way. Monica blew a President but if he was just a Resident of her apartment complex there would be no issue. I think this is Prostitution multiplied by a factor of $Millions as long as all these woman were over 17 years old or what ever the age of consent is where ever the act took place. Guys like Harvey can get laid all night long as long as they have hundred dollar bills sticking out of their under ware.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
      The starlets wanted to get the movie parts and would do (and did) anything to please weinstein. It was an implicit deal and they probably got what they wanted out of it.

      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
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by walkabout 2 years, 11 months ago
      I meant to add that very paragraph. Maybe, since so many in Hollywood claim to be liberals/socialists and only about 1 per cent of them can actually make a living in the trade, we stop giving individuals the multi-million dollar paydays, but rather "re-distribute the wealth" (maybe via membership in SAG) Such that all actors can make a living (not to exceed the median income of regular people). If the promise of being a "star" was not so lucrative the various prostitutes would be less willing to sell themselves for stardom (on the other hand, as a libertarian, why is prostitution illegal?).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by GaryL 2 years, 11 months ago
        I can't believe I am saying this but I do agree that Prostitution should be legal if that's what floats your boat. Prostitution comes in so many forms other than simple street corner sex and I have seen many woman attempting to blow themselves to the top in the workplace. It has been going on since the very beginning.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by davidmcnab 2 years, 11 months ago
    To me, there's an even bigger legal problem -- the issue of acts from the past being judged not by the legal and community standards that prevailed at the time, but through the legal and moral eyes of the future.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 2 years, 11 months ago
    There should be no penalty for sexual dalliance. It's nobody's business except those involved. If either party has been in some way damaged, through incest, rape, pedophelia, that should be handled through our courts. If it happens and a plaintiff refuses to take legal steps then nothing should be done and nothing should be made of it. This habit of piling-on after a brave soul has the courage to use the courts, is almost as despicable as the accused act.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jimjamesjames 2 years, 11 months ago
    I did child abuse investigations for the State of Wyoming for 15 years. Never did an interview behind closed doors, cassette taped every one of them. As to a limit on when it could be prosecuted, for a credible child, under 12 when it happened, no limit. Over 12, until the age of 21. And, in all the investigations I did, virtually none of them turned out to be false..........
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Stormi 2 years, 11 months ago
    Deal with it at the time, or forget it, move on. As a female, I have been groped, and propositioned (in a Congressman's office), but I handled it myself. I did not run crying like a victim to someone else. Let's face it,some of the bimbos in Hollywood actively slept their way to the top, it was their MO. To scream abuse later, ridiculous. I only once had to call on assistance. One jerk would not back off, I could have told management. Instead, I talked to a black pal, a very large guy, and one word from him and the issue was forever resolved. We all went on working together with no further issues. It did not help that a girlfriend was engaged to the jerk and did not need an employed fiancee. You have to trust in yourself, not think like a victim, and take responsibility. You know that seeing the guy as a star, political or Hollywood type, led them into the mess, which they should have seen coming and dealt with.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 2 years, 11 months ago
    Not yet.

    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
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ gharkness 2 years, 11 months ago
    My husband provides music lessons for children in our home. Back when he first started, I insisted that HE insist that each child under 18 MUST be accompanied by a parent (no drop-offs). Girl, boy, makes no difference. No parent, no lesson, plus I greet students at the door now, so they know I am here. Some things are so horrible (including unfounded accusations) it is worth making every effort to avoid them happening.

    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.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
      accusations much later are just ways to damage the other person. Its not fair. Kevin Spacey's life is ruined and nothing has been proven at all at this point. Plus people are coming out of the woodwork claiming he did this and that, and its all heresay at this point.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 2 years, 11 months ago
    Not in the case of politicians. ;^)
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 2 years, 11 months ago
      AND... news media moguls, hollywood creatures and all government workers...
      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.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 2 years, 11 months ago
        I'm remembering Anita Hill coming forth during Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings or the eggon Al Sharpton's face when Twana (can't remember last name) accusations proved bogus. Problem is the stigma remains in many people's minds even when proven false and many years later muck-rakers dig them up at crucial times to sway public opinion when there is not time to adequately refute them.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Suzanne43 2 years, 11 months ago
          I agree. Her name is Twana Brawley. She should have been prosecuted for what she did when she accused four white males of rape. She was trying to cover herself from being punished for staying out late or something like that. Al Sharpton was one of the first to get on the rape band wagon. It was terrible how at first everyone believed her. The Duke lacrosse team comes to mind.
          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!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 2 years, 11 months ago
            Teachers bear an inordinate risk. The glass door was a prudent idea. Its a shame when one risks job lose or worse when they are only trying to comfort a distressed child.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Suzanne43 2 years, 11 months ago
              Yes, they do. As a second grade teacher, I had to be careful. Even giving a hug to a child, which so many needed, had guide lines. Of course the guide lines were just common sense, but having to be told how to give a hug is a sign of the times.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ allosaur 2 years, 11 months ago
        You have me dino thinking of Gloria Girl Obamanations that worked to shoo fly Herman Cane and the Evil Hag's trotted out bimbo eruptions that failed to so much as budge The Donald.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
      I can see the witch hunts are only beginning on this sexual harrassment stuff from even 30 years ago. Its just designed to ruin peoples' lives and a way to get even.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jdg 2 years, 11 months ago
    I believe there is an epidemic of false charges of sexual harassment being filed -- not only because the current crop of "snowflakes" will take any joke (or posted cartoon, etc.) as sexual but because asking someone once is falsely called harassment. And outrageous workplace regulations protect the accuser from retaliation even if proven a liar.

    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.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 2 years, 11 months ago
      One notorious event Manhattan Beach is remembered for is the McMartin Preschool pedophile scandal in the '80s. (strangle bo mention of thi episode in the 2012 Centenial celebration,) The shrinks managed to get children to "remember" all manner of bizzare things and there were bumper stickers saying "believe the children". Sureal. (BTW "pedo"
      means "fart" en Espanol)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 2 years, 11 months ago
    My understanding is as walkabout said, harassment is not a crime. I am not a lawyer (maybe I won't use the internet abbreviation here), but I thought it was a civil contract matter. I could be completely wrong. In my mind it's like hiring a young engineer to develop software and then telling him he has to do some disgusting job like clean filthy toilets or something or else he'll get a bad recommendation in the engineering world. There would be nothing wrong it if the original job description were the disgusting work. But changing the job is not following the agreement, and it could be fraud if the whole thing were a planned trick.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Casebier 2 years, 11 months ago
    Weinstein is an asshole, and every body in the business knew it. In relating how he touched her breast, one actress even reported that he said (like the scorpion to the turtle), something like, "Hey I like it, that's the way I am. But come on in."
    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.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Casebier 2 years, 11 months ago
    Common Law definition of "assualt": An intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.
    "...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...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by NealS 2 years, 11 months ago
    I guess by some of today's perceptions of sexual harassment I could be considered guilty of some of my behavior in the past. This is not any kind of admission of guilt, there never was any rape, no forced anything, only willing complicity. Three particular instances come to mind, but instead of being charged with some crime, all three of them married me. No, not all at the same time, although today it might be possible to change that rule also. And, I'm still sleeping with the third one. I assume it would be too late for her to press charges after some 40 years of sleeping with me.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Temlakos 2 years, 11 months ago
    For someone not in the public eye, the same as for forcible rape. For someone in the public eye, and especially one who put himself there by playing up to women's identity politics? Indefinite.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 years, 11 months ago
      consentual sex of all types in my opinion also includes sex with the hope of getting favors, like a movie part, or political advantage. Those are "deals", not crimes.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by sheinpdx 2 years, 11 months ago
    For sexual harassment I agree, however I think statute of limitations should be removed for rape. Many suffer from PTSD after rape and it may be some time before they are in a mental state to file charges.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo