Don't you know you're throwing POC under the bus by supporting the Police State?!?!?!

http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/81260/

Who do you uppity white women think you are acting all entitled to safety from rape and thinking you deserve legal recourse if you're assaulted? What an out-of-touch upper-class problem to focus on.

There is an article in this week's People (the one with the missing little girl on it) about a woman who was told that none of the prosecutor's withesses were allowed to use the word "rape" or "sexual assault" in their testimony.

Can you look into that?

As an ER nurse i have (unfortunately) frequent contact with our provincial Sexual Assault Response Team (specialized RNs who conduct rape kits). I have been told by them, and by the police officers who work with them, that rape kits are often not processed if the case is prosecutable based on other evidence.

This is not negligent, rather the opposite. If the kit evidence is introduced and is compromised in some way, it can be more damaging to a victim's case than relying solely on evidence obtained by other means. Despite what you might think you have learned from CSI, DNA evidence is not a prosecutorial slam dunk. And why put potentially damaging evidence into the hand of the defendant if other evidence is enough for a conviction?

I don't know whether the LAPD's actions are representative of this rationale; I get the sense that this was not so much of the motivation.

However, gathering a kit and processing it only if necessary can be a means of protecting rape victims from having inconclusive or contaminated evidence used against them.

I only hope that some, if not all, of these kits were not processed because the bastards were convicted without needing them.

Justice didn't move swiftly enough for Broadsheet's taste in response to the gang-rape at Duke U, either.

Judging by the way that Broadsheet normally acts, one would reach the conclusion that rape was not only perfectly legal, but an officially-sanctioned state policy.

The saddest thing is that they hold out this almost promise thing to rape victims, subject yourself to this cruel and invasive procedure, and the bad man will go to jail. And a minority of women do subject themselves to it, and what do they get?

Nada.

Nothing for them, nothing for the next victim, nothing at all.

Oh yeah, this is going to make that under-reported crime more reported. If I have to sit through one more session of the cops telling us we have to come forward and report crimes, and urge our clients to report crimes, I think I might actually be physically ill.

'Cuz we gotta catch those drug criminals and snag up their possessions. We got our priorities right, for sure.

I'd just like to thank TCF and Broadsheet for pointing us in the direction of a preventable and outrageous betrayal of women.

Normally I wouldn't bother with a shout-out, but I assume somebody at Salon counts posts to see which writers are engaging an audience. A story like this—without porn, devoid of gossip, and with clear and sensible political implications—runs the risk of generating no controversy and garnering few posts, or attracting mostly posts by lunatics striving for some sort of pro-rape angle.

We shouldn't ignore the most useful stories when they happen not to provoke arguments.

Bleh. As if we needed more damning evidence against the LAPD.

Sounds like their crime lab sucks. Sounds like they don't give a damn about prosecuting rapists. Sounds like everybody was complacent enough to just let this part of the system fail.

What an incredible misuse of resources. If any of the kits match DNA on record, the DA is practically guaranteed a conviction and some actual "law enforcement." Protecting the innocent. But the only way to get money for this is to beg alms?

Right now, millions of dollars from "righteous" donors are being spent on propaganda to pass the unconstitutional Prop 8.

(This was a great piece.)

Mostly about the guy Jeffrey Marsalis, the Match.com rapist in Philadelphia, and how two juries acquitted him despite 9 victims.

Educational reading - also has previously unpublished statistics (which I can dig up later) about conviction rates for rape cases based on how well the victim knew her attacker. Basically, juries only believe stranger in the bushes rapes (66% of the time), not acquaintance/date rapes (30-something to 42%) or intimate partner rapes (25%).

Sounds like their is a huge civil rights violation going on here !

We can't afford it anymore. Violent crime should take priority.

and that many of these were convicted on other evidence. Nice article, Tracy.

As an E/R doc from LA, this was just one of the many reasons that I took early retirement and left the state several years ago. I saw that the priorities of the state were so skewed towards catching drug users and dealers, and filling the state coffers by snatching up every possession they had, whether they were guilty or not.

Until the government ends this insane War On Drugs, the War On Citizens will continue. I certainly don't advocate legalization of all drugs, but there has be be some sensible compromise to just filling our prisons and jails.

that should be criticized. Very good post indeed. By the way, does anybody support ellietown's statement? This is the most optimistic interpretation, so I, like hyblaean, hope ellietown is right also for the LAPD cases. Is that common practice in other police departments?

Why am I not surprised? Here's a town where the mayor and at least one councilman seem to have morals lower than a snake, yet they are INTENT to castrate all male dogs! They have an Animal Control department out of control, the workers have given their boss a no confidence vote! He'd apparently rather kill animals then get them adopted!

And you're surprised??? Women do NOT count in this administration! Boks, Villar, Alarcon - all seem to be cut of the same slimey cloth! The country is in a financial crisis - and they want to OVER tax kid's pets! Too bad for the women and children of this city! Nice guys - - NOT!

: (