A trial against New York alleging sexual abuse decades ago was rejected Tuesday by the higher court of the State, because there was a lack of specific information, arousing criticism against defenders concerned with the establishment of unrealistic standards for survivors to recall traumatic events.
The State Court of Appeal has reversed a lower court of appeal and granted the state request To reject the complaint of a man who says he has been sexually assaulted on a theater managed by the State in Albany from 1986 to 1990, from the age of 12. The prosecution was filed under the Act of children’s victimsA 2019 state law which temporarily allowed people to pursue the sexual abuses that they have suffered for a long time as a child.
The judges slowed down unanimously with the office of the prosecutor general of the State, which argued that the trial did not meet legal standards for having brought a complaint against the State. The court said that allegations in the trial were too vague to allow the State to investigate the extent of its responsibility.
“The complaint lacks essential information on the attackers. He alleged that the authors understood teachers, coaches, advisers and perhaps other state employees, but that does not explain if these employees were … teachers, coaches and advisers, or why, as a child, he was in their business on several occasions between 1986 and 1990 “, according to the decision of the halligan Caitlin.
The case only deals with requirements to continue New York, not private institutions such as churches or groups of young people.
The Associated Press generally does not name people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they manifest themselves publicly and give their consent.
The case is among around 300 deposited against the state during a two -year window under the law on children’s victims. Most of the more than 10,800 CVA proceedings have appointed private institutions.
Jessica Schidlow, legal director of the Plaidoyer Child USA, said that the court’s decision imposes unrealistic expectations on the victims who pursued the state under the CVA.
“This interpretation neglects the modern scientific consensus on the neurobiological impact of trauma which can seriously disturb memory, and it perpetuates decades of procedural obstacles that stopped the victims,” wrote Schidlow in an email.
The trial was initially rejected by a judge of the Court of State Complaints who cited the lack of specific dates. An intermediate level court of appeal canceled this decision in 2023.