While Mayor, Sarah Palin Charged Rape Victims for their Own Justice

[ccharles000]

Multiple readers clued us into the latest incredibly disappointing fact about Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin: under her mayoral leadership in Wasilla, Alaska, rape victims were charged for their own rape kits. Op-Edna explains:

A rape kit is a sexual assault forensic evidence kit, used to collect DNA that can be used in criminal proceedings to assist in the conviction of those who commit sex crimes. The kit is performed as soon as possible after a sexual assault or attack has been committed. It is usually humiliating and uncomfortable for the victim-imagine enduring that and then paying $1200 just so that the criminal who assaulted you might be caught.
Let's put this into perspective. One of the services that almost every American (with the exception of a few hardcore Libertarians, I suppose) agree that our government should provide is policing and investigation into crime, especially of a violent nature. Rape, one of the most difficult to prosecute, disproportionately affects women--young women, in fact. If Palin wants to play fierce mother hen in her stump speeches, I suggest she explain how it is that she wouldn't do everything in her mayoral power to make sure that rapists be caught and prosected.

What adds insult to injury here is her stance on abortion for rape victims. So, not only did she neglect to support women who were raped in getting the evidence they needed to get justice, but she doesn't believe they should have the right to choose what happens with their bodies after they've endured such violation.

What a frickin' feminist.

Note: the Democratic mayor that followed Palin changed this heinous policy.

http://www.feministing.com/archives/010930.html

[DemzRock]

1. Saw this. But was that Palin's policy or town policy or?

Does anyone have any clue about Palin's views on the policy or if she pushed the policy or what?

[leftofcool]

2. That policy I believe was set by the City Council

as well, the insurance companies were charged, if there was insurance, not the victim

[catgirl]

3. So, no insurance = victim pays the $1200.00

That sounds really fair. And whether she initiated this policy, or not, isn't the point.
The point is, she accepted this policy and kept it. The democrat after her, changed
\it because it was wrong.

[ccharles000]

4. I agree