Should there be a statute of limitations on rape?

There's a big debate on WHY rape cases only have 5 years to be solved and prosecuted. The official excuse is that after so much time, the evidence can degrade or be tainted and witnesses and victims will change their stories. Well why the hell then, is there no statute of limitations on murder? Does their evidence somehow stay showroom new for 100 years? Do all of their eyewitnesses have 20/20 vision and an elephant's memory? No. So if rape is only worth 5 years of police work, why is so much attempt made for decades to solve murders when those victims are already dead and the live ones who are raped just have to deal with the fact that they're only worth a damn for a few years?

With DNA evidence, I don't think it is limited to five years, is it? If there is not any DNA, then I think it should be not able to be prosecuted.

Well, if there is DNA evidence presented or collected at the time of an alleged rape, I don't see how a rape case can't be solved within 5 years. A murder case, the victim is dead so they can't change their story. Maybe there is no statue of limitations on murder because the end result was just that much more serious.

Supernova wrote:There's a big debate on WHY rape cases only have 5 years to be solved and prosecuted. The official excuse is that after so much time, the evidence can degrade or be tainted and witnesses and victims will change their stories. Well why the hell then, is there no statute of limitations on murder? Does their evidence somehow stay showroom new for 100 years? Do all of their eyewitnesses have 20/20 vision and an elephant's memory? No. So if rape is only worth 5 years of police work, why is so much attempt made for decades to solve murders when those victims are already dead and the live ones who are raped just have to deal with the fact that they're only worth a damn for a few years?

As hard as it may be for some people to accept, murder is still a much more heinous a crime than rape. People try to act like rape (in every context) is equal to taking someone's life, but the reality is that it is not. Murder is the highest crime and should have no statute of limitations. A murder is a crime where NEW evidence can actually be uncovered and presented later (DNA; motives; etc) years later. This is often not true in the case of a rape. In a rape case, there is either evidence or there isn't. "Changing stories" raises suspicion about motive and intent and tends to weaken a rape case more than a murder case because it is often the victim that changes the story, not the perpetrator. In a murder case, the victim is dead so only the perpetrators story changes (which increases suspicion). To be honest, I think the statute of limitations should be much less for rape than it currently is due to the fact that people can often cry rape years later when they finally have a motive (verses calling attention to it immediately). That combined with the very loose definition of "rape" in this day and age. Not all rapes are created equally!

It should be LESS than 5 years? Well this evidence you speak of, part of it comes from rape kits, thousands upon thousands of which are left on shelves for years and years because they don't have enough people or time or money to run through them all at once. So you're actually suggesting the law needs to let the evidene decay and the suspects walk before it can be tested and confirmed just to save everybody time.

Supernova wrote:It should be LESS than 5 years? Well this evidence you speak of, part of it comes from rape kits, thousands upon thousands of which are left on shelves for years and years because they don't have enough people or time or money to run through them all at once. So you're actually suggesting the law needs to let the evidene decay and the suspects walk before it can be tested and confirmed just to save everybody time.

I see no reason why a rape kit should sit on a shelf for months, let alone years. Perhaps being in the military has jaded my perspective because whenever an alleged rape is reported, the victim is immediately evaluated (medically, psychologically, etc) and rape kits examined right away. The justice system happens quickly here and if an alleged rape victim waits until the last minute (days or weeks later) to cry rape, they is hardly any evidence left. Rapes need to be reported IMMEDIATELY so that the victim can be examined. A thourough examination will yeild DND results pretty quickly (if at all). If there is a known suspect (and usually there is because the majority of reported rapes are by people the victim knows), they are questioned/interrogated immediately. Ultimately, there is either enough evidence to charge them or there isn't. There is no waiting around for 5 years! Now, maybe it's different in the civilian world (and if so that is a travesty). But that is more a problem with the investigation itself and the justice system overall. That being said, the fact that rape kits are left for 5 years without being examined sounds pretty ridiculous and that is the real problem that needs to be addressed, not the statute of limitations.

I don't think it should have no limitation statute, but I'm fine with prosecuting it up to ten years after the attack–so long as the evidence remains decently in tact and provable.

Chris wrote:I don't think it should have no limitation statute, but I'm fine with prosecuting it up to ten years after the attack–so long as the evidence remains decently in tact and provable.

^10 years would be a lot better.

I think 5 years is long enough to prove a rape case especially if there is DNA evidence available.

Tony Marino wrote:I think 5 years is long enough to prove a rape case especially if there is DNA evidence available.

Yeah, *a* rape case, but there are thousands that aren't solved within the 5 year time limit, a large part of which is due to rape kits sitting on shelves for years before being tested which I suppose is due to lack of manpower and funds to hire additional help or whatever.

Supernova wrote:There's a big debate on WHY rape cases only have 5 years to be solved and prosecuted. The official excuse is that after so much time, the evidence can degrade or be tainted and witnesses and victims will change their stories. Well why the hell then, is there no statute of limitations on murder? Does their evidence somehow stay showroom new for 100 years? Do all of their eyewitnesses have 20/20 vision and an elephant's memory? No. So if rape is only worth 5 years of police work, why is so much attempt made for decades to solve murders when those victims are already dead and the live ones who are raped just have to deal with the fact that they're only worth a damn for a few years?

In all seriousness, I recommend you contact your state representative as this isn't a national policy.