ArchangelMadzz said:
Woah read what I said, I didn't say anyone should be protected. I said as time goes by, it becomes harder and harder to prove. How do you physically prove that someone raped someone 20 years ago without witness'? |
It's hard, but I don't like that they are protected. I hate the statute of limitations. Or at least in regards to anything more than he said/she said. If there is actually evidence, such as DNA taken at the time. I mean isn't there like still ike 20,000 rape kits or something in some cities that have not been tested yet? Or actual video or emails/letters ect that prove without a shadow of a doubt that it happened, then no time should matter. But if it is just he said/she said or only on some witness testimony ect, then I can see how something that happened 20 years ago or whatever could be a tough sell.
But regardless of if its past the statute of limitations or not, coming forward is never bad. Guess what? People typically don't change. If someone raped someone once, they most likely have done it more than that one time, and likely have done it within the statute of limitations. So someone coming forward may give someone else the courage to also come forward and that person may be within the time limit.
