The #MeToo movement has focused attention on sexual harassment and sex assaults in Hollywood and beyond, with some accusations concerning incidents from decades ago. Do you think there should be a statute of limitations on such cases?

Justice in sad situations is one thing. Unwitting metamorphosis into monsters is another. And I am not talking about perps who already were monsters, and may still be so long after the fact.

And anyway these days, do people really think it has been only the females of the species who have gotten the wrong end of the stick?

Definitely. It's ridiculous all these "accusations" of alleged sexual assault Many of which I doubt are even true

There should be no statute of limitations on any crime.

There should be a statute of limitations where evidence is not readily available, where the offense is not felonious and where power harassment is not evident.

Statute of limitations should not apply to a case like Billy Cosby’s, as secret drugging was allegedly involved. It should be used in strictly personal relationships from, say, thirty years ago.

I support the Me Too movement. I hope it will expand to include non-sexual harassment that takes place in schools, offices and, of course, the entertainment business.

Of course not.

One has to wonder at the fear and hatred directed to victims of abuse and assault.

There already are statutes of limitations on these, they vary from country to country and on whether or not the action is civil (someone suing for sexual harassment) or criminal (someone being prosecuted for sexual assault).

The rationale for such limitations is mostly to protect the accused - the more time elapses the less reliable or even available the evidence becomes (witness memories fade or they die, physical evidence decays or is discarded, etc etc), thus making a fair trial more difficult. The severity of some crimes demands over-rides such concerns, so some crimes don't have such limitations. But for civil suits where people are suing for money damages, the law tends to be more strict to deter potential plaintiffs from sitting on claims for too long.

I don't think there should be a statute of limitations. If there were, people like Bill Cosby, Rolf Harris, Kevin Spacey and many others would never have been found out. But when women come forward after decades - last week it was someone accusing Sylvester Stallone of something he did in 1987, it gets tricky. He said it was consentual. She says now that it wasn't.

I remember in the early 1990s at an office Christmas party, I kissed a woman under the mistletoe (as did many other guys and women). it was harmless fun in those days (and often done in movies and TV shows froma bygone era). If that woman were to charge me now with sexually harassing her, I would be in a precarious position. There are a whole lot of activities that were once not considered sexual harassment, which are today. Can you imagine anyone kissing under the mistletoe at an office party in this day and age?

Absolutely.

What's a statute of limitations to the outrage culture? They'll tar and feather whomever they please.

No. If it can be backed up by solid evidence to support the claim.

Yes. If it's just he said, she said.

I guess it depends on the case. For example, U.S. lawyers have told me that there needs to be a statute of limitations in order to prevent a legal logjam. However, they have told me that in the case of children, a statute of limitations should not apply because in the case of children who are victims of sexual abuse often don't know or understand that what is happening to them is a crime until much later.

If a single woman comes forward saying that Mr. X raped her in 1970, it's hard to prove since the physical evidence is gone. However, as in the case of Bill Cosby, if droves of women come forward telling the similar stories about Mr. X, then that's a different story.

Thus, in general there is good reason for the statute of limitations in many cases, but not in all cases either. A special review board might be useful in separating those cases which should be put to rest and those cases which should be further investigated.

I think we might agree that we never truly know the reason(s) why someone does not report a crime that happened to them. I fall on the side of thinking the best way to shed light on that kind of situation is to go to the police and file a report. If you truly want justice, that's how you get it (aside from some vigilante type action).

The issue with virtually everyone in the Hollywood/Entertainment bubble is they crave attention (some are more open about it than others). So for them, the pay to play offers are viewed as if they don't do it, they won't get their big break (or continue to work, move up from C List to B List, etc). And if they report it, oh no, their career will be over. But ultimately, that is their choice.

As far as the amount of time passing since the alleged crime, it's suspect to the average person who's never been in that situation themselves. But the biggest problem with the pseudo-movements today is that ANY woman can jump on Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter and say ANYTHING she wants - raw, unfiltered, extremely detailed - and if anyone criticizes her, they are attacked. We are to believe her words 100% because women never lie, are never scorned, etc. And the men are instantly demoted, fired, outcast, burned in effigy, etc. Anything they say to defend themselves is heresy and bs. That is the state of the USA now. No investigation. Rarely if ever any evidence. Is that equality? Is that modern feminism? Sad.

I guess we can't agree, haha.

Absolutely.

There should be a statute of limitations and it should be 1 to 3 years, tops. (The statue should not start running in the case of minors until they are adults.) By letting time pass the accused becomes severely biased. Rape is a heinous crime, one of the most severe forms of battery. Still, the sexual aspect should not be used to carve out a special niche. Fondling a person without their consent or violating them while they are passed out are horrible acts. Are these acts more horrible that beating someone unconscious with a bat And shattering bones? Yet non-sexual battery has very quick statutes of limitations, often 2 years.

Surely if a person is aggrieved by any sort of assault they would report it to the appropriate authority quick smart. Not wait for years. Hard to understand.