Bill Would Repeal Time Limit on Cases

"Even though I am 51 years old, I am still haunted by what he did to me," she told committee Chairman Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large) and other council members.

Statutes of limitations are deeply rooted in American jurisprudence, and Mendelson said there are reasons why eliminating them is problematic.

"There are issues of evidence. There are issues of memory. There are issues of fairness," he said. "And at some point one weighs out the other."

Safeguards against the sweeping power of the state are a fundamental element of the American legal system, he said, adding, "Our American justice system is built around protecting the innocent."

Maryland and Virginia do not have statutes of limitations for felony crimes, but neither state has lifted the time limit on civil claims arising from the sexual abuse of children as this bill would.

"Eliminating the limitations altogether is not a reasoned and balanced response," Kevin T. Baine, a Williams & Connolly lawyer who represents the archdiocese, said of the provision on civil claims. The archdiocese does not oppose repealing the statute of limitations on criminal charges.

A crush of cases stemming from events decades past could be catastrophic, he said. Any insurance available at the time of the alleged actions would have been secured based on the risks of the day, not now, and it would probably not cover the potential liability.

Jane Belford, chancellor of the archdiocese, who spoke of the steps the archdiocese had taken to deal with abuse by priests, said the proposal was unfair because it would not be applied equally.

For example, the proposed change would not be applied to District schools. Like city agencies, the school district must be notified within six months by a person intending to sue.

"Any change to the statute of limitations should be fair," she said.