Friday, March 13, 2009
Religious Leaders Battle Abuse Bill in New York
Roman Catholic and Orthodox Jewish officials in New York are mounting an intense lobbying effort to block a bill before the State Legislature that would temporarily lift the statute of limitations for lawsuits alleging the sexual abuse of children.
A perennial proposal that has been quashed in past years by Republicans who controlled the State Senate, the bill is now widely supported by the new Democratic majority in that chamber, and for the first time is given a good chance of passing.
If signed by Gov. David A. Paterson, a longtime supporter, the bill would at minimum revive hundreds of claims filed in recent years against Catholic priests and dioceses in New York, but dismissed because they were made after the current time limit, which is five years after the accuser turns 18. Similar legislation has passed in Delaware and in California, where a 2003 law led to claims that have cost the church an estimated $800 million to $1 billion in damages and settlements.
The rekindled prospects of the New York bill, known as the Child Victims Act, come at a delicate juncture for the Archdiocese of New York, the nation’s flagship see, where Cardinal Edward M. Egan is scheduled to hand over the reins in April. His successor, Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of Milwaukee, was so hard hit by settlements for past abuse by priests in that archdiocese that he was forced to put its headquarters up for sale.
“We believe this bill is designed to bankrupt the Catholic Church,” said Dennis Poust, spokesman for the New York State Catholic Conference, a group representing the bishops of the state’s eight dioceses. He said that Cardinal Egan and Bishop Nicholas A. DiMarzio of Brooklyn visited Albany this week to voice their opposition, and that a statewide network of Catholic parishioners had bombarded lawmakers via e-mail.
But while the Catholic Church is leading the opposition, in recent months a loose coalition of disparate groups has also joined the effort. They include leaders of the Hasidic and Sephardic Jewish institutions in Brooklyn, which could face equally costly abuse claims. The New York Civil Liberties Union and the criminal defense bar oppose lifting statutes of limitation as unfair to the accused, who must defend themselves against claims of transgressions decades old.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/nyregion/12abuse.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=hasidic&st=cse
Comments:
The sephardic community federation is run by David Greenfield. Please call him and let him know his attempt to block this bill is deplorable.
He can forget me voting for him in 4 years or forty for that matter when he runs for city council!
He can forget me voting for him in 4 years or forty for that matter when he runs for city council!
Comment Credit ---This article posted by 
: March 13, 2009 2:12 PM
: March 13, 2009 2:12 PM
Follow the money.
That the orthodox leaders don't care about the victims of abuse is past debating. But it's not that they care about the perps either. Rather, they're afraid that their coverups may expose them to liability.
Hint: When you have a Rabbi working for your school that commits flagrant sex abuse, it is *not* the correct answer to see that he transfers to another school.
That the orthodox leaders don't care about the victims of abuse is past debating. But it's not that they care about the perps either. Rather, they're afraid that their coverups may expose them to liability.
Hint: When you have a Rabbi working for your school that commits flagrant sex abuse, it is *not* the correct answer to see that he transfers to another school.
Comment Credit ---This article posted by : March 14, 2009 7:53 PM
: March 14, 2009 7:53 PM
This is outrages!! So they can abuse children, run and hide for however long it is and come out and everything is ok?!?! Let them all hang no matter how long it takes for the truth to come out. Once it is out and confirmed that these monsters did harm to a child, let them fry!!
Comment Credit ---This article posted by : March 15, 2009 12:25 AM
: March 15, 2009 12:25 AM
For the accused that are guilty, the passage of this bill would be a very positive thing. For the accused that are actually innocent, this bill would be a catastrophe.
Because the long passage of time that will have passed between when the act(s) may have taken place and when the accuser comes forward, it becomes almost impossible for the accused to defend himself.
The supporters of this bill are working under the assumption that all accusations are true. (Guilty until proven innocent)
This bill should only be passed if you can find a reliable way to differentiate or many an innocent person will be destroyed.
Because the long passage of time that will have passed between when the act(s) may have taken place and when the accuser comes forward, it becomes almost impossible for the accused to defend himself.
The supporters of this bill are working under the assumption that all accusations are true. (Guilty until proven innocent)
This bill should only be passed if you can find a reliable way to differentiate or many an innocent person will be destroyed.
Comment Credit ---This article posted by : March 15, 2009 12:09 PM
: March 15, 2009 12:09 PM
12:09, you are reciting the standard reasons why statutes of limitations exist.
However, in cases of sexual abuse short of actual intercourse, it will frequently be one person's word against the word of the other.
Now, you are correct that after 10-20 years some memories can fade. But let us posit the following two scenarios:
1) Rabbi A: Taught in yeshiva for 30 years. Was in 2 yeshivas over that period of time. Never accused of molesting anyone to the police. After passage of this bill, still no one accuses him.
2) Rabbi B: Taught in yeshiva for 30 years. Taught in ten different yeshivas. No one ever accused him of molesting anyone to the police. After passage of the bill, 13 former students from 8 of those yeshivas testify that they were molested 10-20 years ago.
How about letting a jury decide the credibility of the witnesses, given the passage of time. Let the jury decide how and why 13 former students from 8 different yeshivas have these, ahem, "false" memories?
Let's subpoena the heads of those yeshivas that COVERED UP THE CRIMES by shipping this charming fellow to a different yeshiva.
However, in cases of sexual abuse short of actual intercourse, it will frequently be one person's word against the word of the other.
Now, you are correct that after 10-20 years some memories can fade. But let us posit the following two scenarios:
1) Rabbi A: Taught in yeshiva for 30 years. Was in 2 yeshivas over that period of time. Never accused of molesting anyone to the police. After passage of this bill, still no one accuses him.
2) Rabbi B: Taught in yeshiva for 30 years. Taught in ten different yeshivas. No one ever accused him of molesting anyone to the police. After passage of the bill, 13 former students from 8 of those yeshivas testify that they were molested 10-20 years ago.
How about letting a jury decide the credibility of the witnesses, given the passage of time. Let the jury decide how and why 13 former students from 8 different yeshivas have these, ahem, "false" memories?
Let's subpoena the heads of those yeshivas that COVERED UP THE CRIMES by shipping this charming fellow to a different yeshiva.
Comment Credit ---This article posted by : March 15, 2009 5:54 PM
: March 15, 2009 5:54 PM
He IS working in another yeshiva. Cant tell you which one though. I cant afford to be blacklisted by the yeshiva MAFIA. know what i mean?
Post a Comment
Comment Credit ---This article posted by : March 16, 2009 3:59 AM
: March 16, 2009 3:59 AM
