New York May Ease Statute of Limitations for Decades-Old Child Sex Abuse Claims, Sixth Circuit Rejects Commonsense Approach to Child Pornography Restitution

[childadvocate]

New York May Ease Statute of Limitations for Decades-Old Child Sex
Abuse Claims

Bill Would Ease Path to Court for Yeshiva U. Victims
By Paul Berger Published March 07, 2013, issue of March 15, 2013.

Adults abused as children decades ago in New York could file civil
lawsuits against their abusers and the institutions that employed
them, if a national surge of legislative reform reaches Albany.

Advocates for child sex abuse victims say that this year, the
prospects look good for a bill that sank four times previously
following strong opposition from Catholic and ultra-Orthodox groups.
If passed, the legislation could ease the way for a slew of lawsuits
against Jewish and Catholic institutions accused of failing to report
accounts of child sex abuse to law enforcement authorities.

“I’ve never been more optimistic we can succeed in 2013,” the bill’s
sponsor, Assemblywoman Margaret Markey, said.

Yeshiva University may also be casting a wary eye toward Albany as it
continues to investigate a scandal involving abuse allegations first
reported by the Forward and dating back four decades.

Read the Forward’s COMPLETE COVERAGE of the allegations of abuse
against staffers at Yeshiva U. high school.

The bill, known as the Child Victims Act, still faces a real test in
the state senate where a key Democrat, Jeffrey Klein, indicated he
would not support it....
http://forward.com/articles/172412/new-york-may-ease-statute-of-limitations-for-decad/



Sixth Circuit Rejects Commonsense Approach to Child Pornography
Restitution
By James R. Marsh on March 8, 2013

Last week, the Sixth Circuit issued this confusing decision on child
pornography restitution.

The Court held that the child pornography restitution statute contains
both a cause-in-fact requirement—i.e., a showing that the defendant's
conduct actually caused the victim's losses—and a requirement that the
cause be proximate.

The Court found that "the statute still allows victims to collect more
restitution than under earlier and concurrent restitution statutes.
The statute expands the definition of victims and the categories of
losses for which victims can receive restitution and makes restitution
mandatory. In addition, the list of recoverable losses that the
statute provides confirms the breadth of what is a foreseeable
consequence of defendants' actions."

The Court concluded that "a proximate cause showing is necessary for
restitution awards under § 2259, meaning the losses must be both
“directly attributable” to the defendant's offense, and “reasonably
foreseeable.”....
http://www.childlaw.us/2013/03/sixth-circuit-rejects-commonse.html