RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims.

RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

kittinSol -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 11:22:32 AM)
Correct: it should be per capita. Bad news for sexually balanced individuals who live over there - the sexual violence is bad. Why argue otherwise?

philosophy -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:10:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius The real confussion on this single attack seems to be that Palin instituted this policy, yet it was a statewide practice (it was also a practice followed around the nation until 2005 when the federal government passed a law requiring that STATES pay for these kits), and the state legislature changed the law in 2000. ...is there any evidence that Alaskan administrators (Palin included) opposed the idea that rape victims ought to pay to collect evidence against their assailants? If Palin was silent on the issue that's collusion. It doesn't mean she was alone, but there are no other Alaskans running for VP of the USA.

Thadius -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:27:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius The real confussion on this single attack seems to be that Palin instituted this policy, yet it was a statewide practice (it was also a practice followed around the nation until 2005 when the federal government passed a law requiring that STATES pay for these kits), and the state legislature changed the law in 2000. ...is there any evidence that Alaskan administrators (Palin included) opposed the idea that rape victims ought to pay to collect evidence against their assailants? If Palin was silent on the issue that's collusion. It doesn't mean she was alone, but there are no other Alaskans running for VP of the USA. There is no evidence either way. Except to add that the police chief in question stated something along the lines of not wanting the taxpayers to be burdened with paying for them, that the criminal should have to pay the cost.

kittinSol -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:35:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius Except to add that the police chief in question stated something along the lines of not wanting the taxpayers to be burdened with paying for them, that the criminal should have to pay the cost. Yeah, I saw that too - how charmingly idealistic of him.

Vendaval -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:42:33 PM)
I am doing some quick Web research on this subject, feel free to follow the links and read up yourselves. From the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault. http://www.andvsa.org/ FBI Crime Statistics by state, 2007 http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_05.html The costs of a rape kit vary from state to state and are considered a combination of medical and forensic procedures. "Alaska We have 9 SANE programs. Each hospital with a program bills a different fee. The hospital bills law enforcement anywhere between $700 and $2200 for the medical-forensic exam, depending on the hospital." http://nsvrc.org/_cms/fileUpload/Projects/FOR_200701_Exam_Funding.pdf

samboct -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:42:49 PM)
Thadius Re your post # 70 "Oh another point you miss in all of that... according to those same records, only 2 rapes occured during her time as mayor. Hardly, a massive epidemic that would require $15k a year in the police budget. Just sayin." Post 78 "The $15k was going for the kits to be purchased up front (estimates on costs per kit range from $500 to $1500 each), I do not know if they have an expiration date or if they go bad. Rape is a serious issue and deserves to be punished to the fullest extent of the law (and in some cases even further than the law allows). From my understanding the kits are only used to collect evidence (DNA) and help with prosecution, and they do have a valuable place in the toolkits of law enforcement, I don't think anybody is denying that fact." Umm- your two statements don't play well together. On one hand, you scoff at spending $15k to help catch rapists or $7,500/case, but in your next post- rape is a serious crime. Well, put your money where your mouth is. If it's a serious crime- then spending less than $10k (given costs of incarceration- that's peanuts) to catch a rapist is chump change. If you're not willing to spend what it takes- well, then, rape just isn't such a serious crime- at least to you. Spending $15k to purchase 10 rape kits (assuming your cost of $1500/kit is accurate- which sounds wildly inflated to me for a swab and a sterile tube to stick it in. Analysis of the swab could easily cost that though or I suspect closer to $3k-5k- but that's only required if somebody's been raped.) does seem a little excessive if there have only been two rapes reported in as many years. So this is how Palin is going to save us money? No wonder Alaska gets so much federal support. Sam

philosophy -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:44:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius The real confussion on this single attack seems to be that Palin instituted this policy, yet it was a statewide practice (it was also a practice followed around the nation until 2005 when the federal government passed a law requiring that STATES pay for these kits), and the state legislature changed the law in 2000. ...is there any evidence that Alaskan administrators (Palin included) opposed the idea that rape victims ought to pay to collect evidence against their assailants? If Palin was silent on the issue that's collusion. It doesn't mean she was alone, but there are no other Alaskans running for VP of the USA. There is no evidence either way. ....well, to be fair if there's no evidence of Palin opposing these fees then we have to conclude a) she didn't know about them, and we probably can expect people in her position to know about them or b) she knew about it and kept quiet.......there is a c) which is she knew about them, opposed their imposition but made no public admission of that. A or B seem to me to be more likely though.....politicians live to make political capital. quote: Except to add that the police chief in question stated something along the lines of not wanting the taxpayers to be burdened with paying for them, that the criminal should have to pay the cost. ...charming. Who appointed them to the position?

DomKen -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:47:03 PM)
So let me get this straight, Thad. Prior to Palin being mayor the Policedepartment paid teh cost for each sexual assault exam and rape kit. Palin is elected. Fires the Police Chief. Appoints a new police chief friendly to her. New police chief presents a budget without a line item for purchase of the kits or for paying for the exams. Palin approved the budget and included it as part of the city wide budget. As chief executive of Wasilla she is responsible for this policy change. Alaskan state legislators allarmed by this practice passed a law requiring that the state pay for the exams and kits. Seems pretty cut and dried to me.

Thadius -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:50:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct Thadius Re your post # 70 "Oh another point you miss in all of that... according to those same records, only 2 rapes occured during her time as mayor. Hardly, a massive epidemic that would require $15k a year in the police budget. Just sayin." Post 78 "The $15k was going for the kits to be purchased up front (estimates on costs per kit range from $500 to $1500 each), I do not know if they have an expiration date or if they go bad. Rape is a serious issue and deserves to be punished to the fullest extent of the law (and in some cases even further than the law allows). From my understanding the kits are only used to collect evidence (DNA) and help with prosecution, and they do have a valuable place in the toolkits of law enforcement, I don't think anybody is denying that fact." Umm- your two statements don't play well together. On one hand, you scoff at spending $15k to help catch rapists or $7,500/case, but in your next post- rape is a serious crime. Well, put your money where your mouth is. If it's a serious crime- then spending less than $10k (given costs of incarceration- that's peanuts) to catch a rapist is chump change. If you're not willing to spend what it takes- well, then, rape just isn't such a serious crime- at least to you. Spending $15k to purchase 10 rape kits (assuming your cost of $1500/kit is accurate- which sounds wildly inflated to me for a swab and a sterile tube to stick it in. Analysis of the swab could easily cost that though or I suspect closer to $3k-5k- but that's only required if somebody's been raped.) does seem a little excessive if there have only been two rapes reported in as many years. So this is how Palin is going to save us money? No wonder Alaska gets so much federal support. Sam The cost comes from an article earlier posted... I did make a mistake, the prices range from "$500 to $1,200 for the costs of the forensic medical examinations used to gather evidence. " That $15k was for the kits alone... spending for police officers and other equipment went up, including the hiring of a full time police department. Therefore, the fighting of crime would seem to be a priority. Again, the police chief stated that he wanted to charge the RAPIST for the cost of the kits and not the taxpayers. Just saying. Spin and rhetoric seem to be flying around everywhere.

Thadius -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:56:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen So let me get this straight, Thad. Prior to Palin being mayor the Policedepartment paid teh cost for each sexual assault exam and rape kit. Palin is elected. Fires the Police Chief. Appoints a new police chief friendly to her. New police chief presents a budget without a line item for purchase of the kits or for paying for the exams. Palin approved the budget and included it as part of the city wide budget. As chief executive of Wasilla she is responsible for this policy change. Alaskan state legislators allarmed by this practice passed a law requiring that the state pay for the exams and kits. Seems pretty cut and dried to me. Prior to Palin taking office, there was no police department, they had a police chief with a few volunteer deputies. The incoming police chief wanted to bill the cost of the kits to the person that committed the crime. The practice of not budgeting for these kits was widespread across Alaska and the US. The legislation in Alaska in 2000 made it so that the state would cover these costs and not the local municipalities. Certain Dems that got beat in elections are now trying to state that the legislation was solely because of Palin. The federal government passed legislation (signed into law by the evil Bush) just a couple of years ago that requires the states to pay for these kits. I think that covers the spin put forth...

kittinSol -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 12:58:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius Again, the police chief stated that he wanted to charge the RAPIST for the cost of the kits and not the taxpayers. And again, the police chief was either an idiot, or a callous bastard, or both. Do you think his was a good idea?

Thadius -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:04:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius Again, the police chief stated that he wanted to charge the RAPIST for the cost of the kits and not the taxpayers. And again, the police chief was either an idiot, or a callous bastard, or both. Do you think his was a good idea? What the idea of making a criminal pay for the expenses that they are responsible for causing? If that is the question you are asking, my answer would be a very strong yes. I would extend that policy to other crimes as well. Kidnappers being required to pay the cost of overtime for the officers required to do searches. The cost of various tests should be paid for by a peson that is convicted of a crime. Are you against a criminal having to pay for such things?

DomKen -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:05:09 PM)
Excuse me? There wasn't a police department but there was a police chief and volunteer officers? How exactly did that work? Now once more according to every article I can find the city paid for the exams and kits prior to Palin and the new chief but that in the new chief's first budget there was no funding for that. As a matter of fact news accounts report that the state law was expressly aimed at Wasilla since it was the only place in the state charging rape victims for the exam and kit.

Thadius -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:13:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Excuse me? There wasn't a police department but there was a police chief and volunteer officers? How exactly did that work? Now once more according to every article I can find the city paid for the exams and kits prior to Palin and the new chief but that in the new chief's first budget there was no funding for that. As a matter of fact news accounts report that the state law was expressly aimed at Wasilla since it was the only place in the state charging rape victims for the exam and kit. Sort of like every other small town. There was a "sheriff" appointed by the mayor. After she took office she moved to get a police department started with full time law enforcement officers. Your last statement is false. quote: Until the 2000 legislation, local law enforcement agencies in Alaska could pass along the cost of the exams, which are needed to obtain an attacker's DNA evidence. Rape victims in several areas of Alaska, including the Matanuska-Susitna Valley where Wasilla is, complained about being charged for the tests, victims' advocate Lauree Hugonin, of the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, told state House committees, records show. and quote: Nationally, victims' advocates have for years reported scattered instances of rape victims being required to pay for their forensic tests, says Ilse Knecht of the National Center for Victims of Crime in Washington. Those complaints have subsided somewhat after Congress in 2005 passed a law requiring states to provide rape exams free of charge or reimburse victims for the costs, says Knecht, whose group supported the provision. quote: Fannon (the police chief at the time) told the Frontiersman that the tests would cost the department up to $14,000 per year. He said he would rather force rapists to pay for the tests, not taxpayers.

philosophy -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:23:58 PM)
...it's all very well saying that this Police chief wanted to charge the accused (note the fact that they can't be treated as rapists until after conviction) the price of providing evidence against them. However, how would that work in practice? No rape kit is used until the accused ponies up? That's not going to happen, and while i'm no constitutional scholar isn't there a fifth amendment issue here? i can see a system working where, if an accused is found guilty, then costs are recouped. But there was no budget to pay for the kits in the first place, which meant if a victim wanted this to be done they would have to pay for the thing themselves. Crass, penny pinching program, which clearly disadvantaged rape victims. Thadius, from my pov, this issue of charging the accused is a bit of a red herring.

kittinSol -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:32:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius The cost of various tests should be paid for by a peson that is convicted of a crime. Are you against a criminal having to pay for such things? I'm against victimising people twice simply because the public authorities are too stingy to take their responsibilities seriously. If they want to try and recoup the money from the perpetrators (if indeed they are found, because that's not always the case) at a later date, why not? In the meantime, they're paid to make sure justice follows its course uninterrupted by such petty concerns as the cost of a rape kit.

Thadius -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:33:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ...it's all very well saying that this Police chief wanted to charge the accused (note the fact that they can't be treated as rapists until after conviction) the price of providing evidence against them. However, how would that work in practice? No rape kit is used until the accused ponies up? That's not going to happen, and while i'm no constitutional scholar isn't there a fifth amendment issue here? i can see a system working where, if an accused is found guilty, then costs are recouped. But there was no budget to pay for the kits in the first place, which meant if a victim wanted this to be done they would have to pay for the thing themselves. Crass, penny pinching program, which clearly disadvantaged rape victims. Thadius, from my pov, this issue of charging the accused is a bit of a red herring. The costs were covered by the operating budget, and not by a line item on it. Which allows for that operating budget to be spent on what crimes are being committed. Yes the costs would be recouped after conviction. I didn't live there and don't know first hand, and I might add neither does anybody else that has posted so far. Talk about red herrings, look at the way this topic was presented. Much like the accusations of the woman not being the mother of her newest, and the book banning and so on and so on. Know what I mean? People suggesting that a single small town is responsible for the legislation passed by the state and federal governments, seems a bit of a stretch.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:36:21 PM)
~ Fast Reply ~ Obviously this is a key component to distinguish the Republican from the Democratic ticket. Know what this thread points out to me, who won't be voting for either of those choices? She has actually done more and taken a stance more often, sometimes against her Party, than the top of the ticket on the Democratic side. Governor Palin actually has some legislative and management experience. What was it again that Senator Obama accomplished during his tenure in the IL legislature? Oh yeah - the most 'PRESENT' votes over the shortest period of time. A man who says he will depart from 'Party Politics' but never once voted against the party politics of Chicago's Mayor Daly or the Illinois Democratic Party machine. His 'Ethic's Bill' passed while in the Illinois senate, insured that his political backer; IL State Senator Emil Jones, was able to transfer in excess of $500k from his election funds ( http://capitalfax.blogspot.com/2008/08/sen-emil-jones-campaign-fund-half.html )into his own pocket. Mr. Jones is retiring, enjoying the benefit of his contributor paid retirement, and passing on this district to his son. Look - obviously no main stream media source will deliver this type of information for you. But really has anyone tried to look into anything of record that the Senator has done similarly to how they are now analyzing Governor Palin? Has anyone else actually done any of their own research, especially regarding facts they may not like to know about whatever candidate they are now following as if he, or she, were a Messiah?

kittinSol -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:39:33 PM)
You know, Thadius, I wasn't going to say anything because, well, I'm actually quite polite at times, but your repeated whining on here that these are unjust accusations propagated by internet malice and online hysteria are a little much to read, in the light of your numerous threads and spurious claims against Obama started on these fora. A few examples: http://www.collarchat.com/m_2112290/mpage_1/key_obama/tm.htm#2112290 http://www.collarchat.com/m_2085620/mpage_2/key_obama/tm.htm#2085960 http://www.collarchat.com/m_2041056/mpage_1/key_obama/tm.htm#2041056 It goes on, and on, and on. Indeed, you seem to be quite a specialist at net search: how do you justifiy your current line of complaint with regards to this particular thread again? Does the end justifies the means in your case, but not in others' ?

philosophy -> RE: Palin imposed fees on sexual assault victims. (9/15/2008 1:51:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius The costs were covered by the operating budget, and not by a line item on it. ...that would work. Do you have any proof that's what happened?

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625