4 ms·
> Ten thousand rape kits tested. One hundred twenty-seven convictions won, 1,947 cases investigated, 817 serial rapists identified. This is crazy. I wonder how
by theptip 9y ago
> Ten thousand rape kits tested. One hundred twenty-seven convictions won, 1,947 cases investigated, 817 serial rapists identified.
This is crazy. I wonder how much it costs to test a kit; this could be a very high-utility charitable donation.
Looks like there is a charity that is pushing this issue (linked from the OP): http://endthebacklog.org http://endthebacklog.org
[edited to add, looks like $8,893 per kit, from http://endthebacklog.org/backlog/why-testing-matters http://endthebacklog.org/backlog/why-testing-matters. Not as cheap as I hoped, not as good an investment as mosquito nets (http://www.businessinsider.com/the-worlds-best-charity-can-save-a-life-for-333706-and-thats-a-steal-2015-7 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-worlds-best-charity-can-s...) but I suspect that's a pretty good return on investment if you want to donate to a US charity.]
- blueline 9y agoI think you're misinterpreting the content of that page. the same source says $1000-$1500 per kit http://www.endthebacklog.org/backlog/why-backlog-exists http://www.endthebacklog.org/backlog/why-backlog-exists I'm not exactly sure what the meaning of the $8000 savings statistic on the page you linked refers to.
- theptip 9y agoThanks - my bad. That's more like what I would have guessed.
- rhizome 9y agoI think you misunderstood the $8893, which is how much was saved by testing the kits in Cleveland.
- cperciva 9y agoSomething to keep in mind here: Testing these kids is orders of magnitude cheaper now than it was when they started piling up back in 1984. This isn't to say that they shouldn't be tested now -- they absolutely should -- but it's less clear that they were wrong to throw the kits into storage at the time. (Especially if they thought for some reason that the case had been resolved without needing to run DNA tests.)