Legislator seeks to end statute of limitations on most sex crimes

SACRAMENTO - Mostpeople accused of rape and other serious sexual offenses can't beprosecuted in California if it's been 10 years since their allegedcrime. On Wednesday, Assemblywoman Sally Lieber announced legislationto scrap that time limit, a nod to victims, she said, too traumatizedto come forward earlier.

The bill could trigger an odd alliance between Lieber, D-MountainView, a staunch liberal on most issues, and tough-on-crime Republicansin the Legislature. But its passage is far from certain: A similarmeasure stalled in the state Senate two years ago without so much as avote.

Lieber's Assembly Bill 261 would eliminate the 10-year statute oflimitations for the most serious sexual crimes: rape, sodomy, childmolestation, oral copulation, continuous sexual abuse of a child,forcible acts of sexual penetration and fleeing the state to avoidprosecution for a sex offense.

``The current statute of limitations is not long enough for victimswho may be too traumatized to come forward,'' Lieber said. ``These arevery serious crimes; they're second only to murder in terms of theirseriousness. The impact on victims is profound and lifelong.''

Lieber's bill would apply only to incidents that happen after thebill would take effect. During the height of the clergy sexual abusescandals, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003 struck down a California lawthat would have retroactively erased the statute of limitations onchild molestation.

The court held that it was unfair to alter the statute oflimitations in cases where it had already expired before the law wasenacted.

California already allows the statute of limitations to be extendedfor serious sexual crimes when DNA evidence is located. But Lieber saidthe law is so riddled with other exceptions to the statute oflimitations in sex cases that prosecutors have trouble deciding when itapplies. She said her bill would remove that ambiguity.

Santa Clara County Assistant District Attorney David Tomkins saidhe'd personally be surprised if the Democrat-controlled Legislatureadopted Lieber's idea. But ``we're always in favor of new laws thatmake it easier to solve violent crimes,'' Tomkins said, ``and I'm surewe'd be in favor of this.''

Opponents argue that allowing cases 10 years old or more increases the likelihood of wrongful convictions.

The California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, the state's largestorganization of criminal defense lawyers, vowed to fight the measurebecause of the ``unfairness'' in trying to prove innocence in old cases.

``I see this change as being no more justifiable than other changesto the statutes of limitations and it just twists the balance sheet infavor of allowing more prosecutions,'' said Jeff Stein, co-chairman ofthe group's legislative committee.

Many people, he said, struggle to remember where they parked theircar at a mall, and in a similar manner witnesses and victims may notrecall events that happened long ago.

``How do you put together an alibi defense on an ancient case whereyou legitimately may have been elsewhere and that it was no fault ofyour own that somebody 10 years, 20 years, 30 years later decides theymade an unsubstantiated claim?''

But tough-on-crime bills often have cross-party appeal. TheDemocratic chairman of the Assembly Public Safety Committee endorsedLieber's bill and it's likely many Republicans will, too.

``I'm completely supportive,'' said Assemblyman Todd Spitzer,R-Orange, a former prosecutor and police officer. ``The psychologicaltrauma and the ability of a victim to come to terms with that traumatypically doesn't emerge until adulthood.''

According to research by Lieber's staff, seven other states have nostatute of limitation for rape. And several other states have no timelimit for prosecuting other serious sexual crimes.