Current, former state attorneys general support elimination of statutes of limitations for rape

Local News

COLUMBUS (WCMH) — There has been a growing swell of support for the elimination of the statute of limitations on crimes of rape in Ohio.  

On Monday, the Ohio Attorneys General Dave Yost joined the governor in asking for lawmakers to make changes to the law.   

In a letter to legislative leaders of the House and Senate, Yost once again asks them to end the statute of limitations.   

The letter is signed by former Ohio Attorneys General Richard Cordray (D), Nancy Rogers (D), Jim Petro (R), Betty Montgomery (R), and Lee Fisher (D), making it a bipartisan effort.   

At a news conference announcing the letter, Yost, Rogers, and Montgomery said rape and murder have a lot in common in the sense they are grievous offenses.   

“In some ways you might say that it’s worse than homicide, because the trauma that stems from rape is born by the survivor for the remainder of life,” said Yost.   

In November 2018, State Sen. Joe Schiavoni once again introduced a bill to completely eliminate the statute of limitations. He says it was in direct response to what was going on at the Ohio State University and an investigation into Richard Strauss, who was accused of misdeeds stretching back decades.   

The bill was introduced well after the deadline for a guaranteed hearing and with the Senate busy dealing with bills in lame duck just weeks before the end of the assembly, it received no hearings.   

However, as this year’s General Assembly began, Republican State Rep. Brett Hillyer introduced a bill designed to help potential victims of Strauss. It limits the alterations of the statute of limitations so narrowly, only those potentially involving Strauss are likely to be affected.   

Yost shared some of his experiences meeting with victims of rape from when he was a prosecuting attorney.  

“You can see them, the pain in their eyes, their body language, sometimes they’re shaking and crying years later; so the human mind is remarkably resilient but make no mistake about it, the damage that is done in the commission of this crime, for many people leaves them unable to even face it, much less talk with anyone about it,” said Yost.  

The legal minds who penned the letter agree that placing a time limit on someone dealing with the kind of trauma that experienced such a personal violation is not right.  

“We’ve come so far in the last 30 years in the understanding of the nature of this crime; I think now is the time to consider this change in the law and the Strauss case is a part of that,” said Yost.  

Montgomery posited there are two very good reasons to make this change now.  

“One is, science has changed; and science helps us determine that we’re getting the right guy. And two: society has changed,” said Montgomery.  

That societal change can be seen reflected in the #metoo movement, as described by Rogers.  

“There also are a series of national events that have led people to understand the kinds of forces that inhibit the reporting, sometimes, of rape,” said Rogers. 

With all of the support building toward this seemingly inevitable change, there remains opposition.   

The Ohio Public Defenders Office released this statement today:    

 “Eliminating the statute of limitations for offenses of rape will result in unintended consequences.  Ohio has a long history of not being responsive to crimes against women.  It will create a lack of incentive for law enforcement to conduct prompt and thorough investigations immediately. Rape kits have languished, unprocessed, and untouched on the shelves for years.  We do not want to further incentivize this behavior.  Statutes of limitations are established to ensure that all key players are doing their jobs efficiently and effectively. Memories fade and evidence depletes and in some cases, even disappears.  Victims, witnesses, and those accused of crimes deserve swift resolutions and finality to their cases.  Just like the old adage, “justice delayed is justice denied.”   

 Yost rejected the arguments of fading memories and lost evidence as not good enough to keep the limitations in place.   

 “Respectfully, I think that that argument fails because we don’t have a statute of limitation on murder, and the same arguments about failing memories would apply in any other situation,” said Yost.   

Yost himself acknowledged that his own opinion on this matter has changed over the last 30 years.   

 He was taught the statutes of limitations protect the legal system, but he says it is not always that cut and dry and that the circumstances surrounding rape as a crime that impacts its victim in such a deep and profound way must be treated differently than simple theft.   

Hillyer will hold a news conference Tuesday to discuss the status of his bill.   

Copyright 2021 Nexstar Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trending on

Today's Central OH Forecast

More Forecast

Don't Miss