Elizabeth Nolan Brown on Charging Rape Victims for Forensic Testing

To hear many people tell it these days, the most pressing concern when it comes to sexual assault is making non-enthusiastic consent a crime. Yet there are much bigger barriers to emboldening victims than an insufficiently robust consent statute, Elizabeth Nolan Brown writes. In many states, victims of sexual assault are being forced to shoulder some or all of the cost of testing their bodies for forensic evidence. We don't ask home-invasion victims to cover the cost of dusting for fingerprints or the families of homicide victims to subsidize blood spatter analysis. So why should rape victims have to pay the state to investigate?
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?