New York Legal Blog

     For far too long, child victims of sex abuse have been largely unable to sue their attackers and those that protect them, because of NYS's antiquated statutes of limitations.  As the New York Times pointed out in an editorial published in January of 2018 (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/opinion/albany-child-victims-act.html) by the time most victims of child sex abuse are able to report the crime, or think about filing suit, they are barred from doing so by NYS law.

     The reasons for the delays in reporting are many, but mostly center upon the immaturity of the victim.  Immaturity that the predator counts on when choosing their victim.  That immaturity works to impede enforcement of legal rights both in criminal and civil court.  Several states in the U.S. have eliminated this hurdle by allowing a longer time for such victims to seek arrest or sue, and by allowing the opening of a short window to sue, regardless of how long it's been since the assault.  But so far, New York has failed to move in step with other progressive states in the U.S.  That is expected to change.

     Until recently, the only impediment preventing such reforms in NYS was Republican control of the NYS senate.  The Democratically controlled assembly and Governor Cuomo have demonstrated their overwhelming support for "The Child Victims Act", Assembly Bill A05885A, which would allow the reforms.  The bill passed the assembly in May of 2018 by a vote of 130-10, a vote which no doubt included some Republicans.  Sadly, Republicans in control of the senate have refused to even allow a vote on the bill.

     Now that the NYS Senate is also controlled by the Democrats, the bill is expected to come to the floor for a vote, and we are urging its full passage.  It is time for NYS to join the march of progressive legislators around the country and stand up for victims of child sex abuse.

     If you or anyone you know has been the victim of sex abuse, especially a child by a member of the clergy, please contact us at Kelly & Rubin, LLP.

After decades of tough-on-crime laws and mandatory minimum sentences that sent people in New York to prison for years, the First Step Act marks a transition in attitudes toward criminal sentencing guidelines. The bill won approval in the U.S. Senate on a vote of 82 to 12. Although critics call it a "prisoner release bill," the legislation, if it succeeds in becoming law, would provide sentencing relief to people convicted for crack cocaine offenses prior to 2010.

In 2010, the federal government corrected disparities in criminal sentences that required longer sentences for crack cocaine convictions compared to regular cocaine convictions. People convicted before the reform, however, remain in prison under the previous rules. If signed into the law, the First Step Act would grant prisoners convicted on crack cocaine offenses the ability to petition for release.

The First Step Act, which is a bill that is being considered in Congress, might have an effect on some inmates in New York. It will make the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act, which addressed the sentencing disparity in cocaine and crack cocaine cases, retroactive, and this will affect approximately 2,600 inmates. They will still have to go to court to address the issue.

The act will also lessen the length of some automatic sentences and expand the number of people for whom judges are allowed to set aside mandatory minimum guidelines. Those guidelines apply to people with no criminal history, but the act will include people with only a minor criminal history.

Proposed rule changes would provide greater rights to students in New York or elsewhere who are accused of sexual assault. During the Obama administration, schools were encouraged to use a preponderance of evidence standard in such cases. This means that a person could be found guilty of sexual assault by a school if it seemed more likely than not that it occurred. The changes proposed by Betsy DeVos would allow schools to choose their own standard of proof.

It may also be possible for students to use mediation as a means of resolving disputes regarding sexual harassment. Under previous rules, mediation was discouraged as it was thought to be potentially traumatizing to a victim. Schools would only be held liable in cases where a sexual assault took place on its campus. Furthermore, it would only be liable in cases when it had knowledge of the event.