Legislative Battle Continues In Child Sex Abuse Cases

Click here to read cover story: “Pushing the Limit: Examining the Legislative Battle Over the Statute of Limitation in Child Sex Abuse Cases,” by Tara Murtha, Philadelphia Weekly, Feb. 8, 2012.

Excerpt: PA Catholic Conference spokesperson Amy Hill declined to discuss SOL reform with PW , saying it was a “sensitive issue.” However, Hill emailed a prepared statement, which reads in part: “Over the years Pennsylvania increased the statute of limitations on sex abuse cases from age 20 to 50 for criminal prosecutions and age 20 to 30 for civil actions. The PCC did not oppose these bills. However, the Catholic Church does not support a retroactive suspension of civil statutes of limitations creating a ‘window’ in cases involving the sexual abuse of minors from many years ago.


7 thoughts on “Legislative Battle Continues In Child Sex Abuse Cases

  1. Sensitive to who ? The enablers and abusers or the VICTIMS who have been told by the court system aided by marsico and caltagirone and the catholic conference of bishops they have NO RIGHT TO BE HEARD ! Amy Hill gets paid to keep the truth hidden as the cowards in the hierarchy want to keep the lock on the closet door that hides all their dirty secrets. If the archdiocese of Phila did not enable and protect the abuser then they have nothing to fear from a change in the Law so why do you think the catholic conference of bishops is preventing legislation that would disclose what they knew and when then knew it ?

  2. “This article presents a fine chronology and summary of the clergy abuse scandal in the Philadelphia Catholic Church as well as the relentless,and, as of yet, futile attempts to secure the kind of legislative reform in Harrisburg that will provide better protection for our children, now and in the future. Why state representatives in the Judiciary Committee, like Marsico and Caltagirone, who are fathers and grandfathers, would choose the insurance industry and religious organizations and their leadership over the best interests of their children and grandchildren is indeed foolish and offensive. A father and/or a grandfather who is in a position to protect thousands of children throughout the Commonwealth and he elects to support the position of industries with highly paid lobbyists, money and influence?? Obviously, some politicians have passed shame, dignity and pride many, many years ago.”

    Read more: http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/news-and-opinion/cover-story/138884039.html#ixzz1lpRx2qX3

    1. It certainly does paint a disturbing, yet clear, picture of politics, doesn’t it? Ethics seem to disappear for some politicians when they are busy “playing the game.” It’s hard to comprehend someone being so shallow as to stand on the wrong moral side of an issue like this. But, for some, maintaining power comes above all. They’ll remain loyal to the insititutions that they think will keep them in power, despite what’s right.

  3. I was particularly struck by the quote relative Senate Judiciary behaviour, and it’s chairman in blocking the legislation.

    “Martinez isn’t buying it. “We’ve also talked to a lot of judiciary committee members and they say there’s nothing they can do. He’s completely road-blocking the bills by not even putting them on the agenda. That’s just not right. We live in a democracy and one man has so much control that he’s the only guy who sets the agenda?”

    It sounds like Harrisburg is NOT a democracy?

Leave a Reply