Removing the Rhetoric, 12 years is better than 2

Chris Redfern is quoted in today's Toledo Blade as linked above stating:

"I'm ashamed to be a Roman Catholic in the Toledo Diocese because my church failed me and will soon fail victims,"

The Columbus Dispatch is reporting this exchange of rhetoric:

"The House took the side of people who rape children," said Sen. Marc Dann, a Democrat from the Youngstown area.

House Speaker Jon A. Husted said that by voting against the bill, it was Dann who was "allowing people to rape children without reporting it."

Before this bill, a person had two years after they turned 18 to file a lawsuit. Now they have 12. This is an additional two years from the ten year period as listed in previous versions of this bill. What was not agreed to was the one year look back period where cases that were up to 35 years old could file lawsuits.

The measure makes it a crime for priests, rabbis, ministers, and other clergy and church employees to fail to report suspected abuse by fellow clerics. It extends the time limit for victims of abuse to file lawsuits in future cases from two years to 12 years after the child turns 18.

The bill would also stop the clock on the statute of limitations in cases where a potential defendant has engaged in fraud or hid crucial information.

Then there is the civil registry on which I need more precise information on. The Blade is stating:

Victims of past abuse could seek a court order to place an accused sex offender's name on the public list, regardless of whether the person has been convicted or charged with a crime. Those placed on the list would be treated much like sex offenders who are required to register their whereabouts.

The Cleveland Plain Dealer has a different explanation of that segment of the bill:

And for cases where the statute of limitations has expired, the House version would allow the state attorney general, local prosecutor or victim to sue a priest - but not for monetary damages. If guilty, the priest would be listed by the state as a child-sex offender.

Isn't that the goal? This gives those who do not meet the 12 year window to file for monetary damages the ability to still take action.

Recently, Several Ohio Republicans including candidate for Governor, Jim Petro tried to imply a Democratic Judge was soft on child molesters. I stated that was not inline with all of the facts as provided on that case. Democrats trying to imply that Republicans as well as the Catholic Church are somehow going to "fail victims" because a one year 35 year window to sue for monetary damages was not agreed to are not behaving any differently.

Yes, I know, the resulting Catholic bashing and how dare you support those pedophile priests, etc. etc., will probably follow. The facts concerning sexual abuse of children and who are the main perpetrators of abuse will be ignored as well as logic that dictates waiting 35 years to sue means the chance of witnesses remembering or the priest in question even being alive to defend the charges are slim. It serves no purpose, except for those who have a different agenda. An additional ten year time period gives a person until they are age 30 to be able to file a lawsuit. Not withstanding the additional impression that even those who have had more than 12 years pass still have an option to file a suit.

So Mr. Redfern, I'm not ashamed to be a Toledo area Catholic, but I am ashamed of the way some of you on both sides continue to use the sex abuse of children as a political way to score points. As to Dann's comment? Depending on what type of comment Chandra makes on this issue that could very well be the final deciding factor for me as to who I support as AG. I'm not giving Husted a pass on his rhetoric either, but he's not asking me for his support or his vote.

If you'd like information on this bill the pdf link to the Senate Journal it begins on page 10, the vote on the bill as a whole is on page 24.

The House Journal votes for the bill on are on page 23, beginning on page 3.

I'd also point out that bills designed to increase the penalities for those who abuse children also were voted on yesterday Ironic that it appears some of the same people accused of allowing victims to be abused voted for the increase in sentencing requirements.