http://callenharty.wordpress.com/2012/02/26/testimony-on-sb-345/

Note: Wisconsin Senate Bill 345, otherwise known as the Child Victims Act, was introduced in December of 2011. It removes the statute of limitations on bringing damages against a perpetrator of child sexual abuse. Current Wisconsin law precludes a victim/survivor from filing suit after the age of 35 years old. The bill was referred to the Committee on Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce, and Government Operations, where it has been sitting since December. This was testimony written with the intent to deliver it to the committee at a public hearing on the bill. Unfortunately, with about a week left to go in the legislative session Committee Chair Zipperer has still not scheduled the bill for a hearing. Please contact him or other committee members to ask that this bill gets a public hearing and moves out of committee.

By our self definition, this is something MS ought to be pushing...making noise in the statehouse.

If I had the energy and money, I'd head out the that cheez state Monday morning and shame them all.

Thanks Rob,
I am fully confident you support and advocate this measure with all your heart! It is not just that it is my former home state, but that the bill is a no-brainer, I mean, why WOULD there be limits on the consequences of abuse?

You and I will have to watch carefully the goings on in that state, and that may serve us well in our home states when if this has not yet transpired in our state houses.

Peace and joy to you, Rob.

Sam

Sam and Robbie,

Your attention to this issue is commendable. I am in a neighboring state so this legislation is being looked at closely.

Peace,
Avery

Is the statute of limitation retroactive to cover all victims today or is only going forward?

Hi Keith,

This bill has the following text;


It would seem, as I am not a legal professional, that the bill is designed to amend verbiage limitations. This would allow a survivor to bring charges against an alleged perpetrator without limitation as to age.



This bill also seems to "revive" legal options for those who have tried to bring legal action against perpetrators and was impeded due to age or passage of time constraints.

If that is not the way it is worded to those who would have the legal'ese to comprehend, please correct this,

Sam

Thank you--that is excellent--maybe it will become a model for other states.

Kevin

Let's play Devil's Advocate.

Is it really a good thing past say 35 or 40? I understand people want to get justice, but, there needs to be some sort of demonstrable proof. Even just a shrink saying they were abuse doesn't mean the person they fingered did it. The Catholic church, scouts, etc. has records that proves it. It just seems to me that some will take advantage of the law and could ruin people's lives needlessly (including innocent ones that do it--false memories). The law is not meant to be emotional. It's meant to be cold and indifferent and calculating. It sucks to be sure. People also have a right to a defense. How can you defend against an accusation you might not even remember especially when it allegedly happened 30 years earlier? Tolling is extremely difficult and a confusing doctrine in civil cases. It seems to me if it is going to be allowed and it's reasonable to bring such a case, unless there is unequivocal independent proof offered, it's a bad law.

Example: John discovers he was raped at 5 and he's now 31. He waits and files suit at 36. What happened to John sucks, but he knew for 5 years. John has no proof really. The other problem.

Example 2: Same John. It was a priest. There is a record. However, that diocese consolidated cases and paid everyone off that made claims. John was too late.

I have no use for pedophiles, but I can see how this is a quagmire already. Lawsuits are extremely emotional things to do. Disappointments can be devastating. So can false accusations that were decades prior. That's why we have tolling except for murder.