DOJ-OGR-00021695.jpg
681 KB
Extraction Summary
1
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
0
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
681 KB
Summary
This legal document argues that the legislative history of a statute of limitations for child sex abuse offenses demonstrates Congress's clear intent for a 2003 amendment to apply retroactively to pre-enactment conduct. It cites a conference report and the 9th Circuit case United States v. Sure Chief to support its position. The document also refutes an argument by Maxwell that the statute's language is only "forward-looking," using a hypothetical offense from the year 2000 to illustrate the amendment's intended effect.
People (1)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Maxwell |
Mentioned in a footnote regarding their response to the statute's text, arguing the words 'would' and 'shall' are 'fo...
|
Timeline (3 events)
2000
A hypothetical offense committed against a 16-year-old in the year 2000 is used as an example to explain the effect of the 2003 amendment.
2006
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in United States v. Sure Chief, concluding that Congress intended the 2003 amendment to apply to pre-enactment offenders.
9th Cir.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in the case name "United States v. Sure Chief".
|
Key Quotes (6)
"mak[e] it easier to prosecute offenders who commit sex crimes that may be difficult to detect quickly."Source
— Congress
(Describing the intent behind enacting a special statute of limitations for child sex abuse offenses.)
DOJ-OGR-00021695.jpg
Quote #1
"inadequate in many cases."Source
— H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-66
(Describing the original limitations period for child sex abuse offenses.)
DOJ-OGR-00021695.jpg
Quote #2
"could not be prosecuted"Source
— H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-66
(An example from a conference report of a child rapist who could not be prosecuted due to the statute of limitations.)
DOJ-OGR-00021695.jpg
Quote #3
"identified . . . as the perpetrator one day after the victim turned 25."Source
— H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-66
(The circumstances of the hypothetical child rapist who could not be prosecuted.)
DOJ-OGR-00021695.jpg
Quote #4
"forward-looking."Source
— Maxwell
(Maxwell's argument that the words “would” and “shall” in the statute's text are only forward-looking.)
DOJ-OGR-00021695.jpg
Quote #5
"[n]o” such “statute of limitations . . . shall preclude such prosecution during the life of the child."Source
— 2003 amendment
(The text of the 2003 amendment ensuring prosecution is not precluded by the statute of limitations.)
DOJ-OGR-00021695.jpg
Quote #6
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document