By Journalist Alondra Perez (OU)
For the first bill seen Friday morning in the house, The University of Oklahoma’s Representative Sherer passed OU-529 with unanimous consent. This bill pertains to Oklahoma criminal procedure affecting section C, the prosecution for sexual crimes. This policy was originally intended to strike the 12 year prosecution window for legal adults and replace it with a 25 year window starting at the discovery of the crime.The original inspiration of this bill was Kansas constitutional appeal which eliminated the statutes of limitation for minors. Rep. Sherer’s first idea was to eliminate the statute of limitations entirely but upon doing research on surrounding states’ statues, it allowed her to settle on a happy average of 25 years.
When doing preparation for session Rep. Sherer instantly knew she needed to amend the current Oklahoma statute upon finding the major time window differences for minors and legal adults. The current Oklahoma statutes state that individuals under the age of 18 may have until their 45th birthday before the window closes on the statute of limitations for prosecution.
“Well I was thinking about it and calculating the numbers, if you were to compare a victim who is 17 when assaulted they would have had until 45 to prosecute, however, a victim is 18 they would have had until 30. They are missing 15 years.”
Rep Sherer hopes the amended statute will lead to a dramatic increase of reporting and prosecution in Oklahoma. In recent years, past decade or so the rate of reported rape in Oklahoma increased by almost 50%, however, it does not reflect the vast majority of committed rapes in Oklahoma (Sherer). After presenting their bill in the House, Rep. Sherer’s bill passed with one friendly amendment. This bill was amended to make it so that there is not a 12 or 25 year window for individuals 18 and older, but to allow for prosecution any time after the assault has been perpetrated.
On the floor individuals raised the concern for the possibility of the evidence losing potency, the author responded with, “The original statute, per the statute that I amended, the 25 years was to begin at the discovery of the crime, or when med professionals obtain evidence. I see the concern but it is important to know that eliminating the statute of limitations does not remove the right of a victim to seek that rape kit and get that evidence submitted. Now with the amendment it simply allows them to process the crime at any time”.
To have it go from the elimination of the complete statute of limitation brought it back to its original attention.
“I was expecting to hear the proposed amendments and was very happy that the amendment proposed was the one proposed and it was a wonderful surprise” said Rep. Sherer.