Aylee
Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007 Status: offline
|
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. Did we learn NOTHING from OJ? If the woman is charged for her rape exam kit and the forensic exam, she now has a CIVIL suit against the person that she is accusing of these crimes. That is not double jepordy. The accused can be found guilty in civil court whether or not they are found guilty in criminal court, and the burden of proof is less. Rape exams are a medical procedure. Trooper Joe is not going to be able to do one. Just like if I was stabbed. I will be charged for the ambulance ride. Charged for the ER visit. Charged for any procedures performed. Charged for any hospital stay. Now, if they find the guy that stabbed me, I can sue in Civil court to recoup those costs. Yes, rape is horrible. Rape exams are not pleasant. The issue here is WHO should pay for them. The kits likely got put on the same type of bill as an ambulance ride would have. Or flight for life. Or search and rescue.
_____________________________
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.
|