@ProPublica While I agree the statute needs to at least be longer than 15 years, ideally none, the focus on DNA just makes me think of all the death row inmates in the States who were placed there and later exonerated because of evidence that was discovered or not considered at the time. Ideally, the statute would be stricken without the need for DNA evidence. Plenty of crimes can and do get investigated without it.

inb4 someone tries to twist that last sentence into a presumption I'm not also aware of the pitiful report and even more pitiful conviction rate for rapists. That's something which we not only should pursue a fix for, but would probably be more effective than removing the statute of limitations. It's just not the topic at hand in this specific thread.