State bill would lift statute of limitations on certain violent crimes

Listen to this article

A fast-tracked legislative proposal lifting the statute of limitations on a handful of violent crimes would erase the legal barrier for victims to potentially receive justice against an offender, but it also could make cases harder to defend after six years.

Assembly Bill 552 passed through the Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections, 7-1, on Thursday morning and awaits a hearing in the Assembly before the Legislature adjourns in March.

The proposal eliminates the six-year statute of limitations in place since 1981 to prosecute first-degree sexual assault of an adult and attempted first-degree intentional homicide, attempted second-degree intentional homicide and attempted first-degree sexual assault of an adult or child.

“Whether it is six days, six years or 20 years,” Rep. Jim Steineke, R- Vandenbroek, the author of the bill said, “victims have to live with physical and emotional scars for a lifetime, so I don’t see why a person should get off scot-free after six years.”

But critics of the proposal, introduced Feb. 9, said it will disadvantage criminal defense attorneys who may be unable to track down evidence or witnesses after decades to effectively defend clients.

Even during a six-year span, Delafield defense lawyer Paul Bucher, of Bucher Law Group LLC, said memories of a crime can fade and that problem will only compound as time passes.

He said if the law passes, it could deter private defense lawyers from taking aged cases because they may be indefensible.

“I absolutely think that’s possible,” Bucher said. “This presents insurmountable obstacles for the defense to put together a case.”

Removal of the cap complicates the ability of a defendant to establish an alibi, said Rep. Fred Kessler, D-Milwaukee, especially if the person is wrongly accused.

As a former practicing attorney and the lone committee member to oppose the bill, Kessler said unless a defendant documented his or her life, it will be impossible to pinpoint the person’s whereabouts during a crime that may have occurred decades ago.

“When I practiced law, I had to use alibi defenses, but how do you reconstruct something if you don’t keep a diary or don’t have checkbook?” he said. “How do you defend yourself?”

Steineke said the evolution of DNA testing, forensic evidence gathering and preservation in criminal cases should safeguard against wrongful convictions if the statute of limitations is lifted, however.

If passed, the bill only would apply to cases currently within the six-year statute of limitations and beyond.

“The statute was put into place when we didn’t have these advances in evidence collection, like DNA and blood testing,” Steineke said. “We don’t have to rely on faulty memories.”

Kessler acknowledged the benefits improved technology provides and because of the advances, he said, there is no reason prosecutions can’t be started within a six-year window.

He views the elimination of the statue of limitations as a rights issue, however, in that the state and U.S. Constitutions provide the right to a “speedy public trial.”

In his time as a Waukesha County District Attorney, Bucher said the violent crimes always received the highest priority to investigate and prosecute.

“I never had a problem getting it done under the statute of limitations,” he said. “Either you’ve got it or you don’t.”

The catalyst for the legislation, Steineke said, is rooted in an Aug. 7, 1999, attempted murder of a woman in Appleton who was dragged to a park and stabbed 23 times by an unknown attacker.  Though the woman survived, nobody was ever charged in the crime and the statute of limitations to prosecute expired in 2005.

“The only thing the statute of limitations does,” Steineke said, “is give criminals closure in the fact that they can’t be tried anymore.”

If the law passes, Steinke said, he hopes it will lead to more prosecutions of cases because the statute of limitations won’t be a roadblock to closure for a victim.

But logic, not emotion, should be the basis for the bill, Kessler said. Only a handful of crimes, including first-degree intentional homicide, do not have a statute of limitations. He said the proposal is a dangerous step towards eliminating timelines for lesser charges.

“With attempt, we’re starting to move away from the real serious types of offenses,” Kessler said, “and into a much more loosely defined area. In my opinion, that is way too far.”