Purpose of “Statute of Limitations”

Eye witnesses are notoriously undependable to start with...after decades, they become even less dependable. Over time, people pass away and forget facts, so trials become damn unfair. That is what was explained to me...

That’s a valid point but with new ways of collecting objective data (DNA etc) it seems like an outdated law.

quote:

---

Eye witnesses are notoriously undependable to start with...after decades, they become even less dependable.

---

This pretty much sums it up. With each day that passes, memory fades. If I had to recall an assault I witnessed 20 years ago, I wouldn't be able to do it legitimately.

quote:

---

That’s a valid point but with new ways of collecting objective data (DNA etc) it seems like an outdated law.

---

Quite the opposite.

Recombinant DNA can mean today someone finds a few of your skin cells. Grows more of your DNA in the lab. Sprinkles it around the crime evidence collected from 2 decades ago. And boom, now your butt's in a sling.

Except that pesky SOL means framing you for the old crime leaves the framer sol.

quote:

---

That’s a valid point but with new ways of collecting objective data (DNA etc) it seems like an outdated law.

---

I agree, but you need to be able to defend yourself...and if everyone who may be able to help in that is dead, you would be at a pretty unfair disadvantage.

Also, if you have a guy that abuses children he probably would have more than one accusation. If it is 30 years later with no other accusations, you have to at least consider the possibility that he is innocent.

Not speaking of pedofilia specificly, but a lot of sex crime accusations are “he said, she said”

Not all cases have statutes of limitations, such as murder, sex crimes against children, etc. Super heinous ones usually don't in most jurisdictions. The reasoning for lesser crimes, aside from the aforementioned fading of evidence, is really a practical standpoint. Would you rather the going rate of prosecution be for first in line kind of thing which it would become? I commit a DWI today and know the backlog is so great that they are still prosecuting DWIs from the 80's and it will be another 30 years before they likely get to me? DAs would have an ever increasing log of prosecution which is already severely undermanned and long enough. At some point focus needs to be more on immediate enforcement.

The most serious offenses have no statute of limitations in LA. Anything punishable by life or death, so First and second degree murder, agg kidnapping, first degree rape, and "for any sex offense may be commenced beyond the time limitations set forth in this Title if the identity of the offender is established after the expiration of such time limitation through the use of a DNA profile." Also, if it's any sex offense committed on a victim under 17, the period until the victim turns 28.

FWIW there is no SOL in Louisana for murder or Aggravated Rape. And other sex crimes have extremely long time limits. I think it’s 30 years after the accuser turns 18.

Getting a fair trial is already hard enough in some of these cases. DNA is not available in most cases. CSI is not real life.

It encourages people to come forward within a prescribed time. It's generally a pretty sound public policy with some exceptions.