Man Gets 20 Years For 1993 Rape

Alberto Barriera

Yesterday, a convicted Virginia drug dealer was sentenced for 20 years for raping a 16-year-old girl on the Lower East Side in 1993. It took nine years for DNA evidence at the crime scene to be analyzed and then last year, the DNA was entered into a national database—bringing up Alberto Barriera.

It turns out that Barriera had been committing various crimes in Virginia for years, but the DNA collection laws are weak there, so his DNA wasn't collected until he was convicted of felony drug possession. When announcing that Barriera was charged with rape, burglary and robbery, Manhattan DA Cy Vance has called for DNA to be collected for all crimes, "Since DNA evidence from the 1993 rape case had been analyzed in 2002, if the defendant’s DNA had been eligible to be collected after his misdemeanor convictions and entered into the National DNA databank, justice for the victim could have been delivered eights years earlier."

After sentencing Barriera, a judge said, "I'm glad the complainant has some closure now."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Jen Chung in News on August 18, 2011 9:09 AM

Comments [rss]

69GeorgeWBush69

Abe Vigoda?

Greg Froober

there is no sculpture of limitations, either

JackBrat72

20-years is not enough. . . the 20-years should have added to it the time between the crime being committed- and the time he was subsequently convicted and sentenced- 18-additional-years in this case; for a total of 38-tears!!

Guest

Huh? What happened to that ridiculous 4 year statute of limitations we have in NY. Was he convicted here? I'm so confused. I need answers! I'm too lazy to google this myself.

Greg Froober

Statute of limitations for rape was removed completely around 2006. So there is no statute of limitations in new york for rape

FU Boy

If I remember correctly, even before 2006, the statute of limitations didn't apply if the rape victim was a minor. Is that right?

SFNY

Not really. When it was in effect, if the victim was under 18 the statute of limitations started when the child reached 18 or when the crime was reported to law enforcement or central register of child abuse, whichever happened first.

FU Boy

Okay, that's ringing some bells. Thanks for the clarification.

Greg Froober

I'm not sure about details like that, but there is some info here:

http://www.gothamgazette.com/a...

Guest

What woman hating bastard thought up that statute anyway?

TimeDown

I don't think the people who created it were "woman hating." It was created well before DNA evidence existed, especially in the precise form it does today so it was thought at that time that pretty much after a few years the rape would be virtually impossible to solve or convict someone of.

Without DNA evidence, most rape trials hung on witness testimony which over years has a tendency to degrade and become jumbled so it was believed that a statute of limitation was needed to protect from the negative effects of that. Murder used to be the only crime without a stat. of limitation. But now, rape is treated with the seriousness that it deserves and DNA has made it possible to get guys like this so finally they remove the statute of limitation. But I sincerely doubt that when the statute of limitation for rape was originally enacted that it was done with intent to hurt any victim.

SFNY

No, not just murder. I think crimes without statues include the Class A felonies first-degree kidnapping and arson, first- and second-degree murder, criminal sale of controlled substances and criminal possession of controlled substances.

Rape and other sex crimes used to be considered Class B felonies, less serious crimes than selling dope.

Now sex offenses including rape are Class A felonies, along with spousal abuse/domestic violence. Despite this, rape reports and offenses are still not always "treated with the seriousness they deserve."

TimeDown

You may be right about there be no statute of limitations for other class A felonies in the past, I'm not positive. When I said that rape crimes are treated with the seriousness they deserve I did not mean to imply that everything is perfect. I think everyone can agree that the way they are generally treated now in NYC is much better than in the past. Not all sex crimes are now class A felonies either. I think the other points in my post still stand.

SFNY

Re witness testimony degrading, at least with rape cases there is more often than not a living accuser/victim who can testify, as opposed to a murder/manslaughter case, so it makes more sense to have no statute of limitations on sexual offenses, and would hopefully mean a greater chance at conviction of the guilty.

Yep, there are probably many degrees of rape and sexual offenses, some might go into Class A-II, B or even C. IANAL, so I have no idea what the breakdown of the categories are. At the very least, let's hope they all carry sentences longer than slinging pot or blowing up someone's property.

SFNY

I believe he's known as "The Man."

Guest

Really???? I had no idea. That's great, that was such a stupid law. Can people who were cheated out of convicting their rapists go back and get justice now?