Stephen J. Schulhofer May 4, Sexual Assault. The membership approved that Draft, subject to a number of amendments. The Council had not yet reviewed those amendments, which therefore required Council approval. Most of the amendments suggested a direction for revision rather than a definitive text; the task of translating each amendment into language that could be integrated into the final black letter was left to the Reporter.
The draft also included Boskey-compliant editorial revisions. It was presented to the Council for review at its meeting in January The comments focused in particular on Section The Council deferred consideration of CD 12 until its meeting in March , to permit the Reporter and ALI staff to meet with these groups and consider their concerns and to give Council members more time to consider the comments. After extended conversations with these groups, the Reporter, working with ALI staff, especially Law Fellow Harry Larson, proposed a number of revisions to the original black letter of CD As in other aspects of this project, the aim was not to win the support of any group for its own sake, but only to produce the substantively strongest possible product.
With that in mind, it was valuable to sit down remotely with leaders of these groups to explore their concerns. In each of our meetings, spokespersons for these groups stressed as did some experts we had previously consulted their strong belief in the importance of these measures.
We are grateful for the time and attention generously given to us and our project by these leaders, including Assistant Attorney General Dellinger and many others. We should not and did not ignore the expertise of these professionals, who feel strongly about the need for maximum efforts to prevent such heartbreaking tragedies as, for example, the severe sexual abuse of a young child.
And these discussions offered valuable insight into practical considerations worth taking into account. Yet in the end, the points raised with us in this regard did not persuade us to overturn the previous, considered judgment, based on extensive research and wide consultation with other experts by the Reporters, the Council, and the membership, which has led to our conclusion that these public-access policies are unjust and counterproductive, even in terms of the public-safety goals they purport to serve.
