Reader comments

On Rape survivor works to change law, abolish the statute of limitations in rape cases


Ron Holzwarth 1 year, 1 month ago

It's rather interesting that in the article and in all of the comments, chimeras were not mentioned even once. If a rapist happens to be a chimera, he can rape with impunity, and the DNA tests used today will exonerate him every single time. He would have to be eventually convicted on the basis of other evidence, overriding the DNA tests, thus forcing the state to pay for the testing for chimerism.

The tests required to detect chimerism are tedious, expensive, and I believe have yet to face court challenge. How common chimeras are is unknown. It used to be said they were "very rare", then it was "rare", then "uncommon." The latest is "unknown," since no large scale studies have ever been done due to their expense, and the fact that chimerism applies to very few individuals.


KansasLiberal 1 year, 1 month ago

deleted (supposed to be a reply)


jhawkinsf 1 year, 1 month ago

Perhaps a discussion should be had about what are the benefits and drawbacks of having statute of limitations for any crime. Then we could all better understand whether rape should fall into that category with murder or if it should remain in the category with other crimes.


Dan Eyler 1 year, 1 month ago

This is a very touchy subject and taking emotion out of it I think Kansasliberal makes some very important points on this topic.


Ewok79 1 year, 1 month ago

Now in the day of DNA testing, once the suspect is proven guilty can't just castrate them? Yes, it sounds harsh. But, it might just reduce the number of rapes in the country. Besides, scum-bags like that don't need to reproduce anyway.


ebyrdstarr 1 year, 1 month ago

To say that the statute of limitations on rape cases is 5 years is not entirely accurate. As of 2001, the sol has been 5 years or 1 year after the identity of the suspect is established by DNA testing, whichever comes later. This statute applies to any rape allegation where the sol had not yet expired when this statute went into effect, so roughly every rape allegation from 1997 on. It could still apply to cases even earlier than that if the statute of limitations had tolled for any reason, usually because the suspect was not in the state of Kansas.

This woman's particular case is a very rare one. Even other rape cases from the '80s can still be prosecuted now if the DNA matches and the suspect had left the state. (I know of at least one that was prosecuted.) This woman's attacker, though, was in Kansas the entire time, so the statute of limitations expired around 1990.

Most rape cases, though, aren't this kind of stranger rape. They're he said/she said cases where the issues revolve around consent, not identity of the suspect. For these types of cases, a 5 year statute of limitations is reasonable and just. Imagine trying to defend against a he said/she said rape charge 10 or 20 years later. How could you still have any text messages or emails that might provide support for your defense? How could you even establish an alibi because who can say where they were on a specific date that long ago?

For any cases like this woman's case, they are already covered by the current statute of limitations law or the statute of limitations has long expired and cannot be revived. This proposed legislation will probably pass because who can say no to crime victims, but it's totally unnecessary and is aimed at fixing a problem that either doesn't exist or can't be fixed.


Left_of_Lawrence 1 year, 1 month ago

Well, wouldn't it be nice if our Governor can sign this. FYI When Kansas first became a state, it was Liberal. Read the book What's The Matter With Kansas, or watch the documentary with the same title. It's available on Netflix.


Cant_have_it_both_ways 1 year, 1 month ago

As long as this law has been on the books, there is a real good chance the left was in charge when it was passed.


geekin_topekan 1 year, 1 month ago

Does this include the Republican Party's defined "legitimate rape?"


chootspa 1 year, 1 month ago

Lawmakers will at least do one right thing this session.


Pywacket 1 year, 1 month ago

What a strong, courageous woman! It's obscene that such a devastating crime would have so short a statute of limitations. I wish he every success in righting this wrong.


Scut Farkus 1 year, 1 month ago

I find it hard to believe there is any statute of limitations, much less only 5 years.


Commenting has been disabled for this item.