This means that a woman you had sex with 40, 50, or 60 years ago can legally accuse you of rape. What could possibly go wrong?

Quote:Quote:

The emotional stories of women who say they were sexually assaulted more than a decade ago by comedian Bill Cosby prompted California state lawmakers to approve a bill to eliminate the state’s 10-year limit on filing rape and related charges.

On Wednesday, Gov. Jerry Brown announced that he has approved the legislation to revoke that limitation.

Beginning next year, the bill will end the statute of limitations in certain rape and child molestation cases.

It will also end the time limit on older cases in which the statute of limitations has not yet expired.

The new law, SB813, will not, however, help women who made allegations against Cosby dating back more than 10 years, including some from the 1960s.

Cosby has repeatedly denied the sex abuse allegations made by dozens of women nationwide. He is facing just one criminal case stemming from sex abuse. A trial is set to begin in June in Pennsylvania.

Defense lawyer Angela Agrusa has said Cosby’s accusers have stirred passions even though their stories of abuse have not been investigated by police.

California lawmakers sent the statute of limitations bill to Brown without a single dissenting vote.

State Sen. Connie Leyva, D-Chino, credited intense lobbying of lawmakers and the governor by advocates who “kept the fight alive for the countless rape victims that have already spoken up and also those that have yet to come forward.”

The bill’s signing “tells every rape and sexual assault victim in California that they matter and that, regardless of when they are ready to come forward, they will always have an opportunity to seek justice in a court of law,” she said in a statement. “Rapists should never be able to evade legal consequences simply because an arbitrary time limit has expired. There must never be an expiration date on justice!”

Seventeen other states already have no statute of limitations on rape, according to the California Women’s Law Center.

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/09/2...ape-cases/

Well now you have the title of your next book "Don't bang California"

This is likely going to become known as the Bill Cosby law. But without any proof, or physical evidence, how can anyone claim rape? There won't be much evidence years later, I would think?

I like how everybody "matters" nowadays.

Those lawyers looking to get some money out of the catholic church over pedophile priests better be all over this law. The church always hides behind the statute of limitations. I can't find out if this change is only for criminal cases.

Aloha!

They'll eliminate evidence for these cases, too. Too many people already think an accusation is tantamount to evidence.

Just another day in the Democratic People's Republic of Marxipornia...

Notice how they added the end of limitations on child molestation charges. Any member of the legislature who would raise concerns about the possibility of false rape claims 50 years later would immediately be branded as a pedophile enabler who is literally worse than Hitler.

Fuck this gay state.

Only a matter of time before California raises the age of consent to 21. Seems like it will be the next big domino to fall for the marxists.

Quote: (10-02-2016 05:55 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

This is likely going to become known as the Bill Cosby law. But without any proof, or physical evidence, how can anyone claim rape? There won't be much evidence years later, I would think?

The greatest irony is that even if they call it the Bill Cosby law, the law won't enable the hags crawling out of obscurity to shout rape at the Coz to actually bring charges. The rape accusations that they could've brought have long since expired, and this law won't resurrect them. It'll be another generation of men who will suffer because some SJW's learned that a sitcom star with a wholesome image liked to hook up with druggy girls in a drug-fueled era.

I'd love it if chicks started accusing lawmakers en masse. See how long it takes them to back peddle.

I think this is a great thing for actual rape victims, but we all know it'll be manipulated by bitches looking to cash out. Guys, be very careful about who you fuck in California, especially if you're an opulently successful dude.

Another reason to never go to California. As if I needed another reason.

Quote: (10-02-2016 10:12 PM)Captainstabbin Wrote:  

I'd love it if chicks started accusing lawmakers en masse. See how long it takes them to back peddle.

I'm sure someone could put the "weaponized autism" to work.

Quote: (10-02-2016 05:55 PM)eradicator Wrote:  

This is likely going to become known as the Bill Cosby law. But without any proof, or physical evidence, how can anyone claim rape? There won't be much evidence years later, I would think?

Advanced kegel exercises will be used to keep evidence for months, maybe even years, at a time.

Quote:Quote:

The emotional stories of women who say they were sexually assaulted more than a decade ago by comedian Bill Cosby prompted California state lawmakers to approve a bill to eliminate the state’s 10-year limit on filing rape and related charges

The new law, SB813, will not, however, help women who made allegations against Cosby dating back more than 10 years



Defense lawyer Angela Agrusa has said Cosby’s accusers have stirred passions even though their stories of abuse have not been investigated by police.



State Sen. Connie Leyva, D-Chino, credited intense lobbying of lawmakers and the governor by advocates who “kept the fight alive for the countless rape victims that have already spoken up and also those that have yet to come forward.”

The bill’s signing “tells every rape and sexual assault victim in California that they matter (just like Black Lives Matter?) and that, regardless of when they are ready to come forward, they will always have an opportunity to seek justice in a court of law,” she said in a statement. “Rapists should never be able to evade legal consequences simply because an arbitrary time limit has expired. There must never be an expiration date on justice!”

"Beginning next year, the bill will end the statute of limitations in certain rape and child molestation cases."

So not all cases but only certain ones? Maybe I missed it, but does it say what exactly would make a rape and child molestation case fall into this category?

If the mainstream media picks it up, then it has no statute of limitations.
Probably used for ex-basketball-player-groupies.

Assuming some of you guys have banged women in California then theoretically couldn't you end up with a warrant and an interstate extradition order (or your American equivalent), regardless of whether you ever go back there?

The problem isn't the statute of limitations. I actually don't have a problem with that. The problem is convictions that happen based on she said he said allegations, not actual evidence.

If the legal system functioned as it should. I.e state has to prove you did something rather than you had to prove you didn't the statute of limitations wouldn't matter.

Allegations with only the allegation as evidence should never get near a court in the first place.
This is the standard of evidence someone can get convicted on now, in the UK, at least:
http://www.libertarianview.co.uk/current...able-doubt

Quote: (10-03-2016 03:18 AM)hv123 Wrote:  

The problem isn't the statute of limitations. I actually don't have a problem with that. The problem is convictions that happen based on she said he said allegations, not actual evidence.

If the legal system functioned as it should. I.e state has to prove you did something rather than you had to prove you didn't the statute of limitations wouldn't matter.

Allegations with only the allegation as evidence should never get near a court in the first place.
This is the standard of evidence someone can get convicted on now, in the UK, at least:
http://www.libertarianview.co.uk/current...able-doubt

hv123 has hit the nail on the fucking head. Across the world, beyond reasonable doubt as a serious standard of proof means absolutely nothing in sexual assault trials.

How often is someone convicted of murder because a single person, a third-party witness, merely said they did it, without any other corroborating evidence? Yeah, I thought so. For sexual assault trials, however, who cares about the burden of proof!

It involved accusations of pedophilia, so no mainstream media outlet will EVER touch the concept of beyond reasonable doubt in relation to this case, but Rolf Harris was proven guilty for many of those counts as well as conspiracy theorists have proven the existence of Bigfoot. He may have abused some of those girls, I don't know, but the evidence was generally as convincing for a criminal matter as meat left outside for a week is fresh.

The worst part in my mind was the presence of "bad character witnesses". These women were accusers who weren't the focus of the trial, but were basically allowed to say on the stand that Harris abused them, all to add weight to the idea that he abused the different set of accusers whose allegations led to him being actually charged.

You can't admit a female accuser's sexual history to trial, yet British courts will allow the prosecution to bring in women who haven't even succeeded in getting you charged, let alone convicted, so they can get you convicted in relation to other women. It's sick.

Next they will criminalize and remove statute of limitations for being "assigned" the wrong race, gender, SAT score, SMV, etc..

Agreed with everything said.

With that, I'd also add that the press and families should be forced to not discuss a rape charge. The accused's name should only be published until a verdict is made, not in the pre-trial at all.

Quote: (10-03-2016 03:18 AM)hv123 Wrote:  

The problem isn't the statute of limitations. I actually don't have a problem with that. The problem is convictions that happen based on she said he said allegations, not actual evidence.

Without the statute of limitations, the accused may find it difficult to present evidence in his defense due to the passage of time (records no longer available, memories become faulty, witnesses die). That's why we have it.

If you don't report a sexual assault immediately and undergo a rape kit exam, you better have a good reason beyond 'trauma' for delaying. And remember Roosh's Law: if she reports it on social media instead of to the police, it's a false accusation.

Imagine how rich Arnold's maid would be if she suddenly remembered she was "raped".
Remember California is the state that started hypnotist and therapy to make people "remember" sexual trauma that happened years ago that they had reportedly buried. I think thats a crock of shit. If you got raped or molested you are going to remember it.