It may shock you, but this prosecutor – who spent her life fighting for the victims of sex crimes – argues P. Diddy, Eric Adams and Steven Tyler could NEVER get fair trials on accusations stretching back years

Francey Hakes is a former federal prosecutor and the Department of Justice's first National Coordinator for the Prevention and Prohibition of Child Exploitation

Mayors, actors, rappers and rock stars: the headlines are full of famous men publicly accused of horrific allegations of sexual assault and even rape.

Some accusations date back many years. Others are decades old.

One of the most horrifying stories comes from the former girlfriend of hip-hop mogul Sean Combs.

Cassandra Ventura says the famed rapper subjected her to a litany of horrors between 2005 and 2019, including brutal beatings, drug-addled hotel orgies and rape.

Combs denies the claims and the two sides reached an out-of-court settlement just 24 hours after the lawsuit was made public.

Despite the terrible nature of this lawsuit, it would not normally have seen the light of day in a civil court.

That's because New York law requires sexual assault cases to be filed within three years of the alleged incident. That legally prescribed time frame is known as the statute of limitations.

Ventura's lawsuit was made possible by another New York State law, the Adults Survivors Act (ASA).

The ASA has suspended the limitation period for one year – from November 24, 2022 to November 24, 2023 – for any case where someone claimed to have been the victim of a sexual offense after turning 18 years old.

According to the ASA, New York Mayor Eric Adams was accused of sexual assault in 1993; Axl Rose, former Guns and Roses frontman, is accused of rape in 1989; and actor Jamie Foxx allegedly groped a woman in a Manhattan lounge in 2015.

Cassandra Ventura (above, right) says the famous rapper subjected her to a litany of horrors between 2005 and 2019, including brutal beatings, drug-addled hotel orgies and rape.

Under the ASA, New York Mayor Eric Adams (above left) has been accused of sexual assault in 1993; former Guns and Roses frontman Axl Rose (above right) is accused of rape in 1989; and actor Jamie Foxx allegedly groped a woman in a Manhattan lounge in 2015.

Many victims' advocates are now hailing the ASA as a landmark piece of legislation.

California has introduced a similar legal scheme and their filing period is open until the end of 2026.

There are even calls to abolish the statute of limitations on all alleged sex crimes – as the idea gains popularity across America.

That would be a serious mistake.

The ASA and others like it upend centuries of legal precedent – ​​and while I have no doubt that its supporters sincerely seek justice for the victims – America cannot ignore the rights of the accused.

If it seems like I am writing in defense of abusers – nothing could be further from the truth.

Of all people, I take allegations of sexual assault incredibly seriously.

As a state and federal prosecutor, I have spent sixteen years of my professional career fighting for victims of sex crimes and personally prosecuting hundreds of perpetrators.

President Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder appointed me as the first National Coordinator for the Prevention and Prohibition of Child Exploitation and charged me with ending child sexual abuse in the United States. To this day, I provide expert testimony at trials and educate my law enforcement colleagues.

I believe that all women have the right to report crimes, to expect careful investigations in support of criminal charges, and to file civil lawsuits when necessary.

I believe that all abusers should be held accountable for their despicable misdeeds.

But as someone who is committed to justice, I know the statute of limitations exists to protect the innocent. And this age-old concept, rooted in centuries of legal precedent, should not be so easily dismissed.

The basis of this jurisprudence dates back to ancient Greece and Rome. A fair trial – the right of a suspect to confront the witnesses testifying against him, to obtain relevant evidence in his defense and to present his own witnesses – is a core tenet of criminal law.

The United States declared its independence from King George hundreds of years ago, in part because the legal system gave few rights to suspects.

The U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights defined the protections afforded to a suspect to prevent the unjust removal of a person's life, liberty, and property without sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of innocence.

How does that apply here? Take the recent disturbing allegations against Aerosmith's Steven Tyler.

He is accused of an assault that allegedly occurred in the summer of 1975.

A woman claims she was 17 when Tyler allegedly attacked her in New York City as they walked down Sixth Avenue together.

Steven Tyler (above right) is accused of a sexual assault that allegedly occurred in the summer of 1975.

A woman claims she was 17 when Tyler allegedly attacked her in New York City as they walked down Sixth Avenue together. (Above) Steven Tyler in San Diego in 1975

The accuser, Jeanne Bellino, says Tyler pushed her into a phone booth and molested her — then forcibly kissed and molested her again at the hotel where he was staying.

Again, the alleged story is horrible. Anyone found guilty of such an act must pay a high price. Although most Americans would certainly agree that Tyler is entitled to a defense.

Well, almost 50 years after the meeting, what kind of defense could possibly be in place?

What witnesses can he call to refute the accusations? What documents might still exist that provide him with an alibi?

As prosecutors like to say, the evidence only gets worse with age.

Documents such as receipts or other paperwork that could provide a defense tend to disappear or be deleted. Consider hotel bills that could show that a person was in a completely different neighborhood, or even a different city, at the time alleged in the lawsuit.

Human memory is even less reliable.

Imagine that on this day five years ago you were accused of committing an injury or offense against someone.

Do you have any idea where you were, who you were with or what you were doing that night while reading this column?

I doubt you do.

It is also irresponsible of America to ignore the cultural climate in which these very serious allegations are being made.

As a former prosecutor, I have pushed back against the “believe all women” mantra that gained mainstream acceptance in the wake of Harvey Weinstein's horrific rapes and assaults and the rise of the “MeToo” movement.

There is also no doubt that many victims of sexual violence must have felt intimidated by powerful men in male-dominated industries, and that fear prevented them from reporting crimes.

As a former prosecutor, I pushed back against the “believe all women” mantra that gained mainstream acceptance in the wake of Harvey Weinstein's horrific rapes and assaults and the rise of the “MeToo” movement.

But our sympathy and understanding do not allow us to set aside the fundamental legal principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' in favor of the perverse standard of 'guilty until proven guilty'.

All reasonable people must accept the possibility that not all allegations are true.

Unlike most other crimes, false claims are made about rape and sexual assault.

Other crimes – such as murder or carjacking – have clear physical evidence. Sexual assault, on the other hand, rarely has physical evidence, despite what you see on TV. Sexual violence is a crime that usually takes place in secret and victims often delay reporting it due to feelings of guilt and shame.

These unique factors can cause false allegations to occur between two and ten percent of all reports, according to a U.S. Department of Justice study.

Finally, as Americans consider passing new laws that erode the statute of limitations, they should remember that it's not just celebrities who are among the suspects.

More than 3,000 cases have been filed in New York State alone – and the defendants in most of these lawsuits are ordinary people.

If your family member—a brother, sister, father, or aunt—faces horrific, reputation-destroying accusations of sexual assault, wouldn't you want them to have a fair chance to defend themselves?

Of course you would. And in fact, the American legal system demands this.