Stogner V. Californi Legal Case Study
I believe Stogner v. California (2003) favors the offender’s rights because the offender escaped justice due to passage of time. In some cases, I believe passage of time could be acceptable, but in cases of serious personal and psychological injury, I do not believe passage of time should be such a factor.
When the law regarding sexual assault was written, these types of crimes did not carry the penalties and time limitations that they do now. I venture to say, it was not viewed as serious as it is now, and the knowledge we have gained on the psychological damage and trauma these types of offenses cause was not known. Even today, victims of sexual abuse are stigmatized and they often find it hard to come forward to report the crime because they feel that they are a fault somehow, or are viewed as “damaged goods” and may have to recount the crime in a public forum thus bringing embarrassment and humiliation upon themselves and their families. I believe California’s law was in good faith to correct an error and address the problems associated with these types of crimes. However, the majority did not see it that way. …show more content…
Even though this case does not prohibit victims from pursuing civil restitution, the process is not in the favor of the victim (Stogner v.
California, 2013, p. 653). Again, the victim has to relive and “air” their ordeal in a public forum with the same conditions they would/did experience in criminal court. I am going out on a limb and will say, many just want to put this chapter in their life behind them and try to live a “normal” life. Furthermore, the dissenting opinion also states that this not only harms Ex Post Facto jurisprudence but also these and future victims of child abuse (Stogner v. California, 2013, p. 653).
Reference:
Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003). Retrieved March 30, 2017, from
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/539/607/case.html
When the law regarding sexual assault was written, these types of crimes did not carry the penalties and time limitations that they do now. I venture to say, it was not viewed as serious as it is now, and the knowledge we have gained on the psychological damage and trauma these types of offenses cause was not known. Even today, victims of sexual abuse are stigmatized and they often find it hard to come forward to report the crime because they feel that they are a fault somehow, or are viewed as “damaged goods” and may have to recount the crime in a public forum thus bringing embarrassment and humiliation upon themselves and their families. I believe California’s law was in good faith to correct an error and address the problems associated with these types of crimes. However, the majority did not see it that way. …show more content…
Even though this case does not prohibit victims from pursuing civil restitution, the process is not in the favor of the victim (Stogner v.
California, 2013, p. 653). Again, the victim has to relive and “air” their ordeal in a public forum with the same conditions they would/did experience in criminal court. I am going out on a limb and will say, many just want to put this chapter in their life behind them and try to live a “normal” life. Furthermore, the dissenting opinion also states that this not only harms Ex Post Facto jurisprudence but also these and future victims of child abuse (Stogner v. California, 2013, p. 653).
Reference:
Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003). Retrieved March 30, 2017, from
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/539/607/case.html