The media actually dug it up in 2000, while she was mayor (1996-2002). It was an article in the regional newpaper. (From the OP: : Knowles signs sexual assault bill

- Frontiersman). I doubt the mayor at the time, Palin, did NOT know about it.

Irrelevant.

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

Oh. OK. That works for me. I guess you win.

__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson

It is, IMHO, completely irrelevant whether any victim was ever actually charged for the collection of a rape kit.

It's an unconscionable policy.

The collection of evidence is a function of the State, not of the victim. One wouldn't charge a shooting victim for the ballistic comparison of the bullet recovered from their body to a suspects gun. Same principle here.

Matt

Suppose I have a policy that states that any black person that comes into my apartment will be beaten to death.

Does the fact that no black person has been in my apartment since I moved in make me any less of a racist prick?

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

My point is more that when you you moved into that apartment, it came with the policy that you must beat any black man who enters. Black men have come to your apartment, on many occasions, and none were beaten. Since the policy isn't enforced by you, you just ignored it and failed to change the policy.

__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson

The fact that the law exists is the problem. To use the analogy, it means that if someone enforces the law and beat a black man who came into their apartment, then that person has no right to take their attacker to court. Common decency is not enough. Sometimes there have to be laws to back it up.

Right. The policy is on the books. Even if they don't apply it in practice, it may be applied at some point and they would be perfectly within regulations to do so.

Ha.ha.ha.--Here you are trashing Palin for something that may or may not have happened in her township of Masilla (while she was governor)--& the question to you was (who was billed for a rape kit in Wasilla) & you call that irrelevant?

Try to going to court, in front of a judge, to get money for a rape kit, when you never paid for one. I don't think a judge would think your case "relevant".

Actually what he said is irrelevant is IF anyone was charged. That does nothing to answer the question of why this regulation is on the books.

The previous police chief did not have this policy, so it's unclear exactly what was on the books. He was chief until 1998, when the new guy took over, so as far as I've been able to determine the new chief was off the reservation.

__________________
Andy
Cynical Optimist

It's on the books for the same reason it's illegal to fish from a giraffes neck in Illinois. Someone, at one time, had a brain fart and the law is there.

We don't disagree that it's a bad law and a slap in the face for a victim of rape. We don't disagree that Palin, or any other city official, should have recified it by removing it from the books.

But, I still ask, was this law in practice by Palins administration? It is relevant.

The other question is... why are there so many black men going in and out of Donkey Lefts apartment?

__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." -Thomas Jefferson

I don't know anything about laws in Illinois. And I'm trying to find out more here. However, it seems that the path of least resistance is not to have it on the books. There was pressure form the state troopers to not have this policy. Few, if any other towns had this policy. The state legislature had to pass a law to make it mandatory that no towns had this policy as Wasilla did.

That seems quite odd, especially if the intent was never to charge someone in the first place.

Here's another question: Has this always been a policy in Wasilla or was it just policy when she became mayor in 1996 up until the state legislature made the town change it in 2000?

All these questions go to the "why" of it being on the books.

From what I can gather this wasn't a law on the books at all, but a policy under police chief Charlie Fannon. Furthermore, Fannon was opposed to the legislation to eliminate this practice and Palin is on record as saying that hiring Fannon was the best decision in her administration, this is pretty damning in my eyes.

Could you please link to the information that makes you 'gather' that this wasn't a law on the books but a policy from Fannon? That would be helpful in shedding some more light on this.