Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rights and Liberties

Revisiting the Wasilla Rape Kit Story

By Lindsay Beyerstein, AlterNet. Posted September 29, 2008.


News that Wasilla charged rape victims for forensic work has hit the mainstream. But the practice is more common than we think.
Advertisement

As mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin approved a budget that eliminated the police department's funding for rape exams.

The decision to stop paying for rape kits could have disqualified the entire state from receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grant money through the Violence Against Women Act, which requires states to certify that some public agency is picking up the tab for all rape kits.

Forensic sexual exams are performed by nurses, but they are actually part of the police investigation into a crime. During the exam, the victim's body is searched as a crime scene. Charging victims for these exams is the equivalent of charging a burglarly victim for the cost of fingerprinting and photographing a crime scene.

Palin's handpicked chief of police, Charlie Fannon, made the decision to stop funding rape exams, even though the department didn't bill victims of other crimes for investigations. The policy went into effect in 1998.

With the stroke of Palin's pen, Wasilla became the only town in Alaska where the police wouldn't pay from rape kits as a matter of official policy. According to testimony before the Alaska legislature, there were scattered reports of victims being charged elsewhere in the state as well.

The State of Alaska outlawed the practice in 2000, over the strenuous objections of Chief Fannon. The Alaska State police have never billed victims for rape kits, according to a spokeswoman for the Alaska Department of Public Safety.

Palin claims she had no idea that rape victims were being charged on her watch. Yet, it appears that Chief Fannon waged a vocal campaign to defend the policy in the media after a bill was introduced in the State legislature to ban the practice.

Last week, Palin spokeswoman Maria Comella told USA Today that the candidate "does not believe, nor has she ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test."

The Alaska state legislature outlawed victim-pay exams in 2000. Chief Fannon complained to the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman that rape kits were an undue burden on the taxpayers that should, if possible, be shouldered by the perpetrators. If Fannon had a plan for billing rapists before their crimes were investigated, much less tried, the Frontiersman didn't mention it.

The costs weren't exactly astronomical. At the time, the exams cost between $300 and $1200 each. Wasilla, a city of approximately 7000, typically sees between one and four reported rapes per year, according to federal crime statistics.

Lauree Hugolin, then the director of the Director of Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, testified before an Alaska House committee in 2000 that individual women were being billed for exams in the Mat-Su Valley -- Wasilla's borough. She stressed that the police were sometimes billing women indirectly through their insurance companies.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: rape, wasilla, sara palin, rape kits, charlie fannon, forensics

Lindsay Beyerstein is a New York writer blogging at majikthise.typepad.com

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Let's Revisit History
Posted by: QQOblivion on Sep 29, 2008 9:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read it was Joe Biden back in 1994 who drafted the Violence Against Women Act in the Senate.

John McCain voted against the act!

Also, I would like to point out that, even though the 300-1200 dollars for each rape-kit is not a lot of money for even a small-town police force, it IS a lot of money to many women without health-insurance.
Not only does a woman have reason to feel like she is being blamed for being raped, she also is being PUNISHED for being raped by being charged for the kits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Let's Revisit History Posted by: mainspark
AN ONGOING MYSTERY
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Sep 29, 2008 10:24 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The legitimate dirt being uncovered about this woman each day doesn't seem to matter. I wonder why. She had a baby with serious health problems and walked off 4 days later to go back to work. She abandoned the child. Sorry but she's an irresponsible self centered brat. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let us assume she's telling the truth
Posted by: g on Sep 29, 2008 12:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't believe it, but let's assume that Palin tells the truth when she says that she did not know about the policy of changing rape victims (and no other victim of crime) for the costs associated with the investigation.
In a sense, this is even scarier. In saying that she wasn't aware of the policy, and in thinking that that's a good excuse, Palin is telling us that she thinks that Americans are quite OK with a leader who is absolutely clueless about what is going on in the city-state-nation that she is supposed to be in charge of. "I didn't know!" "Oh you poor thing!"
WTF! It's her frickin' job to know. If she didn't know, she is not qualified to be a mayor, not to mention the VP of the US. If she did know, and did not care, she is not qualified to be a human being because of her callousness. On the other hand, it looks like way too many Americans are not really bothered by her choices-so maybe *they* will get the leader they deserve. But what about the rest of us??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And the winner is...
Posted by: JohnJlws on Sep 29, 2008 1:12 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Interesting there are now, including this one, 5 comments to a story that should at least create as much moral indignation as say a President getting a blow job, but remarkably not a ripple.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How many states?
Posted by: kittybrat on Sep 30, 2008 5:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just how many states have this policy in place?
This is so wrong, It should be included in the investigation cost.
How sick to charge insurance or the victim directly.
If these "leaders" are so shocked, do something on a federal level for pity sake!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

hope the rape kit cost comes up in VP debate.
Posted by: whealeydj on Oct 1, 2008 11:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it is just outrageous to make crime victims pay for forensic tests anywhere ever. I am not sure I believe Palin's denial; it is implauisible to me. I would like to see a denial from her police chief saying this was all my idea, not Mayor Palin's;then I would beleive. McCain-Palin they are not just tough on crime, they are tough on victims as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]