COLUMBUS, Ohio – An Ohio Supreme Court decision is expected soon that could impact the amount of financial compensation child sexual abuse victims can receive.
Jessica Simpkins was raped at the age of 15 by her church pastor – a man hired by Grace Brethren Church in Sunbury despite the knowledge that he had previously sexually abused two girls.
In a civil suit, a jury awarded Simpkins $3.5 million for pain and suffering, but the amount was reduced to $250,000 due to a state law that caps damages.
She says she's being re-victimized and took the case to the Ohio Supreme Court.
"I just feel like they're protecting the church,” she states. “When they had the accusations made against him previous, if they wouldn't have let him start this church, it would never have happened. "
Simpkins' attorney argues the law is unconstitutional as applied to juvenile sexual abuse victims, as they can suffer more emotional damages than physical or economic harm.
But attorneys for the church maintain large awards on non-economic injuries are subjective and difficult to quantify.
Arguments were heard in December and a decision is expected any day now.
Sexual assault victims often face a long, hard road of recovery, and Simpkins says she can't get over the horror of her attack.
"There's like two to three times a week it's like a whole tape of the day will just replay in my head and it's like I have to freeze for a while because I can't do anything, I can't stop it,” she relates. “I know I need counseling, but I know I'm not ready to talk about it. I have a big problem with trusting people and I have an alcohol problem."
Some supporters contend caps benefit the state's economy by creating a fairer and more predictable civil justice system.
But Simpkins' attorney, John Fitch, says it's bad public policy that shields those who engage in the sexual abuse of children.
"The law actually protects those who are responsible for the rape of the child, be it the rapist on in this case, an employer who does nothing in the face of accusations of sexually predatory conduct,” he states. “That's just outrageous and it's immoral."
get more stories like this via email
A new report from The Sentencing Project debunks the myth of a post-pandemic crime wave fueled by young people.
In March, Congress held a hearing about a spike in carjackings in big cities, but the data actually show a drop in overall robberies by youths in 2020, and a drop in the share of crime committed by youths over the past 20 years.
Tshaka Barrows, co-executive director of the W. Haywood Burns Institute in Oakland, rejected calls to ditch progressive policies on juvenile justice.
"To think that somehow we don't need to revisit failed approaches that specifically have a racial impact that's structural - that dates all the way back to the founding of this country - to me, is disingenuous," he said. "It lacks a true reflection of the magnitude of what we're dealing with."
Barrows said he supports restorative-justice programs that rehabilitate young people and keep them out of the criminal-justice system. He said he views the recent recall of progressive San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin as a setback, and added that huge investments in law enforcement have not made communities safer.
Report author Richard Mendel, senior research fellow at The Sentencing Project, said he thinks young people who commit minor crimes should not be expelled or locked up - but rather, redirected to counseling.
"You take them away from school, you take them away from activities of rites of passage and adolescence, and you surround them instead with incarceration, with other troubled kids," he said, "and it's a negative dynamic that halts their natural progression to 'age out' of these behaviors."
State data show the felony juvenile arrest rate decreased from 2019 to 2020 - from 3.9 per 1,000 to 2.7 at the height of the pandemic.
get more stories like this via email
A new report from Indiana University revealed stark racial disparities in bail costs, and outlined how those higher costs can have long-term impacts on folks charged with crimes and their families.
According to the report, bail across the country is set an average of 34% for Black detainees and 19% higher for Latino detainees, compared with their white counterparts.
Krystal Gibson, program analyst for the Indiana University Public Policy Institute, said increased cost makes it more difficult for many to get out of pretrial detention.
"Research does show that detaining people before their trials, it really increases their risk of future criminal behavior," Gibson reported. "It can harm the defendant, their family and community, and it disrupts an individual's life."
According to the report, eliminating cash bail could help reduce those racial disparities, since it would level the field for all ethnicities, regardless of the charges they face. Its authors point to New Jersey, which reduced its dependence on cash bail, and saw a 35% decrease in its jail population.
Come July, Indiana will enact a new law restricting the operation of charitable bail funds. Among other restrictions, the law would prevent charitable funds from bailing out people charged with a violent crime.
Gibson said the policy could potentially push detainees to rely more on for-profit bail-bond companies, which still are permitted to bail out those facing violent-crime charges.
"When you use a bail bond agency, individuals have to pay several fees, including this 10% nonrefundable fee, no matter the outcome of the case," Gibson pointed out. "And that can be thousands of dollars."
The policy currently is facing a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of the Bail Project, a national bail fund whose Indiana operation is likely the largest such fund operating in the state.
The two groups argued, among other things, the policy violates the Bail Project's constitutional right to equal protection under the law, as it was drafted essentially to solely target their Indiana operations.
get more stories like this via email
Advocacy organizations of differing ideologies appear to be in agreement when it comes to certain bail reform efforts in Ohio.
The Senate Judiciary Committee will hear proponent testimony on a proposed fix to an Ohio Supreme Court ruling, which said courts cannot use public safety as a factor in setting bail.
Senate Joint Resolution 5 would put a constitutional amendment on the ballot in November to allow courts to use public safety and other factors in determining the amount of bail posted.
Alan Smith, criminal justice fellow at the Buckeye Institute, a free-market public policy think tank, argued Ohio would be better served by bipartisan reform efforts in the Legislature.
"The focus here is on accused persons who are in jail because they couldn't organize bail money and people with resources can pay their way out," Smith pointed out. "There's a discrepancy there."
Senate Bill 182 and House Bill 315 would write into law the presumption for release rather than detention and greatly reduce the use of cash bail. The measures also are supported by the ACLU of Ohio, Common Cause Ohio, Ohio Conservatives for Bail Reform, and Policy Matters Ohio.
Supporters of the constitutional amendment, including the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association, argued judges should not be limited in their ability to consider victims' rights and public safety. But Smith countered changing the constitution would undermine current and future legislative work.
"It may affect negatively some of the long-term work that's been put into bail reform," Smith explained. "There might be perceived conflicts because one set of rules is in the Constitution and another set would be statutory."
Smith added reducing the use of cash bail will keep people with low-level offenses out of jail and save the state money, while preserving the principle of innocent until proved guilty.
"There's a wide spectrum of ideological interest in making the system better," Smith noted. "It all comes back to public acceptance. The idea is that we could improve the system that's out there, and in that sense, I suppose improve civilization."
The Senate resolution gets its second hearing today. Its companion bill, House Joint Resolution 2, was passed by a House committee last week.
Reporting by Ohio News Connection in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.
get more stories like this via email