Kansas ended statutes of limitation for child sex crimes, but it gets complicated in court

Kansas last year eliminated the statute of limitations for any crime involving the sexual abuse of a minor, allowing victims to seek justice in criminal courts indefinitely.

Dozens of child sexual abuse survivors testified in support of the bill at the capital, recounting their traumatic experience and its impact on their lives. Research shows children who experience child sexual abuse can develop mental and behavioral health issues well into adulthood.

“This crime committed against them and their experience will never be disconnected from them for the rest of their lives. The impact of child sexual abuse varies depending on the individual, but these impacts are life-altering,” Julie Donelson, president and CEO of the Metropolitan Organization to Counter Sexual Assault, told legislators.

Most children that experience sexual assault don’t disclose that it occurred until well into adulthood, and the average age someone reports sex abuse is 52 years old, according to Child USA, a national think tank that advocates for child protection.

Though the statute of limitations on child sex abuse is now abolished, the average person who was sexually abused as a child still wouldn't have an avenue for recourse in Kansas for many years.

Not all child sex abuse cases are able to be tried under 2022 law

When the statute of limitations was abolished for child sex abuse, it joined a small number of other crimes that are exempt. In 2013, then-Gov. Sam Brownback signed into law the abolishment of statutes of limitations on cases of rape and aggravated sexual assault.

At that time, murder and terrorism were the only charges that could be prosecuted without factoring in the statute of limitations.

But because of the nature of statutes of limitations, many victims’ hands are still tied when bringing alleged perpetrators before the court.

On April 12, the Appellate Court of Kansas dismissed charges on an alleged child sexual assault due to the byzantine statutes of limitations that govern Kansas law.

In February 2022, a man, who just a month prior was sworn onto a Kansas school board, was charged with one count of rape and criminal sodomy of two young girls in the late 1990s.

The state, using testimony from a woman only identified by the letters M.H., alleged that the man had repeatedly digitally penetrated M.H. while reading her stories at night between August 1998 and March 1999. She was 11 years old, and living with her aunt and the man, who were married at the time.

“When she got pregnant at age 17, she talked to a psychologist and realized what (he) did to her was a crime. She did not report (him) at that time because of her immigration status, language barrier, and her parents' attitude. Nobody had threatened her,” the Appellate Court's opinion said.

During the same period, another alleged victim, identified as K.C., claimed that the man licked her genitals after her mother changed her diaper when she was just 3 years old in 1997. K.C. said she informed her mother immediately, who made him apologize but took no further action. He and K.C.’s mother married shortly after.

“When she was a child, she kept bringing the assault up to her mom until she was five years old. Her mom told her to stop bringing it up or her mom would not take care of her anymore. Her mom told her she should be ashamed about it,” court documents said.

The man, who was tried on the charges, successfully argued that the charges are time barred under the statute of limitations despite being brought after the 2013 Brownback amendments.

“Crimes are prosecuted under the law in effect at the time they occurred when considering what constitutes criminal conduct. The laws regarding statutes of limitations are not truly retroactive in the strict sense,” said John Francis, a professor of law at Washburn University.

Why are the charges time barred?

The deciding factor in dismissing the charges wasn't the 2013 law that abolished statutes of limitations for rape and aggravated sexual assault, but the 1998 statutes of limitation. The 1998 statute of limitation is five years for a rape case, but it allows some extension for minors.

Minors would have five years to prosecute a rape case upon learning a crime had occurred as long as they were under 15 when it occurred, and either didn’t realize what happened is a crime, that a parent or guardian prevented the survivor form contacting law enforcement or if expert testimony indicates that the survivor psychologically repressed the memory.

Since M.H. realized what happened was a crime when she was 17 in 2004, the five-year clock started ticking for prosecution. Had the revelation happened five years later, and the statute of limitations didn’t expire by the time of the 2013 amendment, she would be allowed to seek prosecution.

“If the court found that circumstances that suspend the running of the statute of limitations had prevented the SOL from expiring by the effective date of the 2013 law, the prosecution could be brought at any time.  This is because, prior to the SOL expiring, a new law eliminated the SOL,” Francis said. “However, if the SOL had already expired by the time the new law became effective, the new law would not revive the already expired statute of limitations.”

K.C. on the other hand, claims she only realized a crime had occurred in 2021 at the age of 28 years old, well after the 2013 amendment on statutes of limitations. But the court, still working with the 1998 standard, didn’t find substantially competent evidence that K.C. realized it was a crime in 2021.

“Based upon the previously cited testimony from preliminary hearing the court cannot find that there is legal and relevant evidence that reasonable person could accept as adequate to support the conclusion that K.G.C. only realized last year, at age 27, that the alleged act (oral copulation of 3-year-old child) in count of the complaint was a crime,” the district court said while granting a motion to dismiss the case.

Though statutes of limitation aren’t truly expired for cases of rape and child sex abuse, the 2013 and 2023 amendments still give sexual assault survivors greater leeway to seek justice.

“I am sad to say the person who sexually assaulted me is still out in the public and has never been held accountable,” said Earl McIntosh, a survivor of child sexual assault while speaking to legislators. “This bill won’t benefit me; I am not here advocating for myself. However, this legislation is bigger than me.

"I’m here advocating for my fellow brothers and sisters who have suffered alongside me while their attacker roam free.”

This article originally appeared on Topeka Capital-Journal: Kansas statutes of limitation guide child sex abuse cases despite law