If that’s the case though, the problem isn’t the removal of the statute of limitations is it? Sounds like there’s a bigger issue.
Well, look at it from the Texas prosecutors’ point of view - they’ve been embarrassed over and over by exculpatory DNA evidence publicized after someone has been sent to death row. What kind of meanie would deprive them of the chance to send someone to death row for a crime that can’t be disproved? DNA was making it un-fun for them; less-definitive recovered memories will help them rebuild their self-esteem. After all, pointing out that the semen sample only matches 1 out of 14 markers of the defendant creates unpatriotic doubt of the system, while just pointing out that during the time of the assault the defendant was in another state is attacking the victim for not having a perfect memory, you monster, you.
Yep, those Texans sure are anxious to kill folks. I’m surprised they don’t still hang people. What in the world created a state-wide mentality that is stuck in a 1947 Hollywood version of the Wild West?
One problem is that this may lead to overcharging and the defendant pleading guilty to a lesser offense, even if actually innocent, to avoid the risk of going to trial on the more serious offense. This happens all the time. For example, in California, what you might regard as a simple fight or physical altercation can result in a charge of torture for the person who got the shade better of the exchanges, and no matter if the defendant, himself, got badly banged up as well. Torture carries a life sentence, so if you’re that defendant, do you take the plea offer of one year for assault, or risk going to trial on the torture charge and being convicted? You might have believed you were defending yourself, but that may not help you.
This type of scenario combined with decades-old evidence and recollections, even for something as heinous as child sexual abuse, is unsettling.
A badly and creatively misquoted Bible at that… :dubious: 
-FrL-
I don’t think a statute of limitations is that important in any case. A proper justice system can determine whether or not evidence is still acceptable, and whether or not it justifies conviction regardless of its age. Solid evidence that doesn’t decay over time, is still solid evidence. Eyewitness testimony is one piece of evidence that degrades more than others (although physical evidence is notoriously poorly maintained)–but I’ve given eyewitness accounts virtually zero credibility throughout my life.
It’s only luck that some eyewitness testimonies are accurate, and any criminal trial where they form the entirety of the evidence should be thrown out in my opinion, unless there are multiple eye witnesses with recorded testimonies that do not vary significantly.
Texas must have some strange need to be laughed at. Not with. At.
Y’know, I can’t help be interested in this development. I can’t help but think of the debates that have gone on here and in RL over the recidivism rate for sex offenders, and what should be done about it. I didn’t think any location would go to the extreme (that some people DO advocate) that Texas has, but here we go. It’ll be interesting to see how this affects the debate - whether people will see how complex the issue is, or if people will have to die for that to become obvious…
Well there is this case of a 17yr old having consensual sex with a 15 yr old and sentenced to 10 years in prison.
Man, the version of this post that I got in my email made for a much more disturbing story. 
-FrL-
Man, the version of this post that I got in my email made for a much more disturbing story.
-FrL-
I don’t see how punishing someone 20 years after the fact protects children, if the person is still committing the crime 20 years later they have reason to jail them on the new crimes. This is a vengeance law IMHO.
Treason during times of war IIRC has the death penalty.
This seems to be a cut and paste of 2 unrelated verses:
Similar in Mark and Luke
Similar in Mark
Treason is punishable by death during peacetime too.