You have two problems with any potential
criminal case, which you, somehow, expect
a prosecutor to bring. One is the, very
obvious, evidentiary deficit. The second
is the legal standing deficit, conferred
by the statute of limitations onto the
alleged rapist. This latter may be,
paradoxically, more easily overcome than
the former. But, you MAY have to resort
to some unethical behaviour, if not,
outright law breaking, in order to
nullify the immunity, which the SoL
confers on him.
I am, in NO way, advocating any of the
following:
If a person breaks a law, so as to cover
up the exposure of his prior crime, even
though his legal culpability for that
crime had expired, the original crime CAN
be grandfathered into an ongoing criminal
conspriracy case. Both the prosecutor and
the judge must sign off on this
interpretation of the conspiracy laws, but
cases adjudicated under this tactic have
been upheld. With a decades old rape case,
the prosecutor will make it worth the
defendant's while to plead out.
You might track this person down, confront
him, and, perhaps, suggest that you will be
taking an apartment near him, so as to keep
an eye on him. If he offers you something
of value to go away or remain silent, ie.
a bribe, a jury COULD infer, by this act,
a 'consciousness of guilt', arising from
out of the original crime. With that and
your testimony, a jury MAY be swayed to
convict. But, most prosecutors will avoid
such a contrived strategy, like the plague.
The last resort is blackmail, and it would
be, ultimately, self-refuting. If you
suggest to him that 'I'll not go forward
with the rape accusation against you, if
you give me X amount of money' Or, even
'How can we make this go away?' He could
very easily convince a jury that by paying
you off, he merely wanted to get rid of an
annoyance, by saying something like, "I
deeply regret my conduct and association
with Straight INC. But every act I performed
was under the strict orders of the Straight
officials. It was the tenor and the idiocy
of those times, which had inspired these
abuses. I am remorseful for breaking heads,
pinning children down, and watching as others
did those things, but I NEVER raped this girl.
When she arrived, at my apartment and out of
the blue, mentioning Straight INC, the
nightmares, which I thought I'd banished,
returned. We believed, decades ago, that we
were fighting a WAR, not a war of our own
making, but a war, which the vast bulk of
the population rabidly supported and still
supports. I am very sorry for this women's
sufferring, brought on, not by me, but by
the abusive practices of Straight. Yet how,
logically, can her extorting money from me
bring her any closure and justice? She was
the one who initiated the criminal act! She
did so for the money." Almost certainly,
you'll be the one who ends up in prison.
