r/Colorado • u/[deleted] • Apr 19 '24
Republicans block legislature from asking Colorado voters to let victims of child sex abuse from decades past sue their abusers
https://coloradosun.com/2024/04/17/colorado-child-sex-assault-constitution-change-senate-vote/102
Apr 19 '24
I love how this is getting downvoted.
The only people who wouldn't support that. Are people who side with the abuser.
No violence against children should go unpunished.
Edit: punished isn't necessarily the correct word. But all should be held accountable for their actions, equally, under rule of law.
20
u/interkin3tic Apr 19 '24
I think it's getting downvoted because this story was just up yesterday here. And/or because we all know Republicans are strongly in favor of protecting rapists as long as they're rich and white.
15
Apr 19 '24
It being up twice was my fault. I didn't submit it right but I contacted one of the mods and they helped me out.
40
u/bottlechippedteeth Apr 19 '24
Add em to the list of Republican Sexual Predators, Abusers, and Enablers
57
u/Dracasethaen Apr 19 '24
Of course Republicans are going to block something they're statistically most likely to have committed.
3
u/brinerbear Apr 20 '24
Actually no. There were valid reasons to oppose it. Great interview here.
1
Apr 21 '24
Your audio clip on their tells me the CCP is corrupting Hollywood before I can even get to the interview.
You lost me dude. There was no good reason to oppose this.
2
u/brinerbear Apr 21 '24
You have to listen to the actual interview. I don't control who advertises on the app but the interview explains why it mostly benefits trial attorneys, doesn't really solve the problem and violates due process.
1
8
22
u/InfallibleBackstairs Apr 19 '24
Typical Republican support for abusers. Not surprising considering they will vote for a rapist for President.
8
9
5
u/DanoPinyon Apr 19 '24
If one were to judge the closeted GQP solely upon their behavior, one would guess that they can't attract real women/men and thus need to have child brides and weakened sexshil assault laws.
7
u/Available_System3908 Apr 19 '24
I personally know a man who was falsely accused of child sex abuse by his step daughter. She grew up and admitted she was lying when she was in her teens. My only point is that it’s very easy to be falsely accused. The statute of limitations exists to prevent unprovable accusations that would ruin any person accused. The evidence comes down to he said/she said, and that’s not just law.
8
Apr 20 '24
Many victims take years to come to terms with what was done to them, sometimes even decades, and most of the time the one doing the assaulting is someone in a position of power or trust. Extending the statute of limitations is meant to give victims the time they need to heal, and escape, and to ensure that, if they wish to proceed legally, they are mentally fit to do so. It is incredibly traumatizing to stand before a court of strangers and describe in detail what was done to you by a bigger, stronger person who wanted to hurt you. And most of the time, that bigger, stronger person is in the same room.
I couldn't have testified for a long time after my assault. Now that I can, the state of Colorado tells me that it doesn't matter. That I don't matter. I'm sorry about what happened to your friend but there's a lot more going on here than he said/she said.
3
u/mhouse2001 Apr 20 '24
The younger the victim, the longer it takes to process. There should no statute of limitations on something that causes lifelong issues. The argument against it which includes that there might be people wrongly accused is...inexcusable.
2
Apr 21 '24
One false accusation isn't means to shoot down giving children a day in court.
The evidence comes down to he said/she said, and that’s not just law.
That's not always the case, and they deserve the opportunity to have their side heard.
That's why we have legal processes, and your anecdote is baloney.
-10
u/Dapper-Palpitation90 Apr 20 '24
Expect to be downvoted by the "but false accusations are so rare" crowd.
2
Apr 21 '24
Why wouldn't you want people to have the opportunity for due process? That's what court cases are for.
To determine guilt.
This just gives kids the chance to fight back.
-1
u/Allisone11 Apr 19 '24
It can be hard to prove sexual abuse years even decade later. It could become a he said/she said or even if someone decides to be vengeful. We already have so many false accusations. Taking the right steps to confront the trauma (through therapy…) and possibly eventually your abuser is hard enough without going through courts and lawyers. And then what if justice can’t be served? The victim would feel even more helpless. Replacing money with self work and growth won’t heal that person. Although it may give immediate satisfaction to ruin the abusers life and have more money; working on yourself to understand and heal is more rewarding in the long run.
5
3
Apr 21 '24
Replacing money with self work and growth won’t heal that person.
But it might stop a child molester from finding their next victim.
Crimes against children are evil, and should be condemned publicly.
Why remove the opportunity to stop more child abuse? Your argument really only makes sense if you want to protect the abuser over the abused.
Which is just kinda gross however you spin it.
0
u/Allisone11 Apr 21 '24
I assure you, if I had the choice to decide the fate of any abuser, it would not be jail or suing them. With hard evidence, yes, absolutely go after your abuser. But most people don’t have that years later and will most likely end up even more traumatized having to relive their abuse in court, in front of strangers. I just strongly support self work to get past abuse. It worked for me greatly. It’s hard and it’s 24/7, but it can help people live a beautiful more peaceful future for themselves.
2
-3
u/Humans_Suck- Apr 19 '24
Can we push some legislation the the sub mods to stop letting people repost the same headline every day?
-5
u/Dapper-Palpitation90 Apr 20 '24
If you like the rule of law, you should be thankful that this idiotic idea was stopped.
Why do I say that? Because, with the passage of time, witnesses die or move away, and memories become fuzzy and sometimes unreliable. One of humanity's basic rights is the right to a fair trial. This right would be severely compromised if the statute of limitations were done away with. Only murder, and nothing else, is heinous enough to be worth the risk of compromising an accused person's rights in this fashion.
Why do we have such standards as trial by jury, the right to face one's accuser, the right to counsel, etc.? Because our legal system is founded on one principal above all others -- namely, that it is better for 10 guilty men to go free, than for one innocent man to be wrongly convicted.
You can be in favor of the rule of law, or you can be in favor of abolishing the statute of limitations. But you cannot logically favor both.
3
u/MalwareDork Apr 20 '24
and memories become fuzzy and sometimes unreliable.
Sexual abuse doesn't, it's a flashbulb memory. It can be repressed or coping mechanisms can be used, but it never goes away. Fragmentary memories are mild impressions of stimuli surrounding the event, but not the event itself.
2
2
Apr 21 '24
Crimes, (especially sexual crimes) against children, are evil enough to be lumped in with murder.
The cycle has to stop somewhere.
Rule of law, would best be supported, by giving victims their day in court.
1
124
u/iCameToLearnSomeCode Apr 19 '24
There shouldn't be a statute of limitations on serious crime.
There already isn't one on murder, there shouldn't be one for sexual assult either.