EDIT: As the article now states, the changes were made to clear up a legal redundancy, not to limit recourse for sexual assault victims. Everybody move along.
Do I get to point out now that the story has been updated and the only reason it was taken out was because it was redundant and already covered in separate legislation?
Pays to be late to the game. And no I did not just defend scott walker in general in any way shape or form.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.