Police knew who her rapist was. The law kept them from prosecuting him for the attack.

Dana Beatty, a sexual assault survivor, was unable to prosecute her attacker because the statute of limitations had expired decades after the crime occurred. The case highlights the significant legal disparities across U.S. states regarding time limits for prosecuting serious sexual violence.
Why it matters
It underscores the ongoing national debate over whether statutes of limitations for sexual assault should be abolished to ensure justice for long-term survivors.
Dana Beatty survived a horrific rape that took decades to solve. After 34 years, authorities were finally able to identify the masked intruder who pressed a knife to her neck, wrapped her face in tape, lashed her to a bed and assaulted her for hours on Aug. 1, 1989. DNA evidence pointed to a local doctor who turned out to be someone Beatty knew. He was the husband of her best friend. But Beatty’s assailant couldn’t be charged with rape. Authorities told her that the statute of limitations for the crime — which was six years in Ohio at the time of the assault — had long since run out, and a 2015 update to the state’s statute didn’t revive the case. “Disbelief” is how Beatty, 67, described her reaction to the development.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in