Presumably the law concerning the statute of limitations was thoroughly thrashed out prior to reaching the statute book. Different places came to different views as to the length of time dictated by the statute, what exemptions should apply to modify it, or even if, for sexual crimes against minors, any statute of limitations should apply. The law in any particular jurisdiction is what the law is. My feeling is that a limitation in this particular set of circumstances is not ideal, but conversely I would also argue that the arguments for presenting a case must satisfy a progressively higher bar as time elapses.It is a difficult issue to resolve. After a considerable period of time has elapsed how is justice best served? Neither Joe nor Jim seem to articulate a decisive argument- both sides have merit. For this particular crime a closure for the victim is of far greater importance than satisfying the letter of the law. Surely restoring the complete mental stability of the victim is the end result required.(having not been there I cannot begin to understand the victim's anguish, often bottled up for years) Compensation should not just be financial. I know nothing about the subject but I would have thought therapy was required above all. The additional cross the victims have to carry is that they themselves(30% according to some figures), due to their own abuse subsequently go on to start the cycle of abuse all over again
That is a terrible legacy.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/01/24/science/sad-legacy-of-abuse-the-search-for-remedies.html?pagewanted=all