Shadowy Man
Contributor
Except that the truth is usually funnier than fiction.
-
Features
Donald the Orange and Family Sued in NY
- Thread starter starwater
- Start date
Every country favors the rich, the only question is by what degree.
Because the Republicans have so starved the IRS that it is going to leave porcupines alone.
"Who is the victim here" is the plea of those who know they are guilty of a crime and want to convey, "It's not like I was caught raping your daughter, so let's just let this one go..."
Which constitutional right dos this infringe upon? Statute of limitations is a legislative limitation, not a constitutional one.
It's retroactive. The law at the time of the offense should apply.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Which part of the Constitution says that?
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,057
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
Statutes of limitations, like mandatory sentencing laws, are a fundamental breach of the separation of powers. They are the legislature imposing on areas that are the prerogative of the judiciary, and those legislators who propose such measures should be in jail.
If an individual case deserves leniency because the crime occurred long ago, then let the judge decide that.
Legislators decide what is lawful in general; Juries decide whether the law has been broken in a specific case; Judges decide what penalties are appropriate on a case by case basis, with reference to the prior penalties imposed for similar offences.
Statutes of Limitations take the jury's right to determine guilt, and the judge's right to determine punishment, and hand them to a legislative body that almost certainly made their decision long before the crime even occurred. Such decisions cannot possibly take account of the particular circumstances of a given crime, and should therefore not be permitted in any system that wishes to present itself as fair or just.
If an individual case deserves leniency because the crime occurred long ago, then let the judge decide that.
Legislators decide what is lawful in general; Juries decide whether the law has been broken in a specific case; Judges decide what penalties are appropriate on a case by case basis, with reference to the prior penalties imposed for similar offences.
Statutes of Limitations take the jury's right to determine guilt, and the judge's right to determine punishment, and hand them to a legislative body that almost certainly made their decision long before the crime even occurred. Such decisions cannot possibly take account of the particular circumstances of a given crime, and should therefore not be permitted in any system that wishes to present itself as fair or just.
It's an ex post facto law.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Ok. So Article I, Section 9, Clause 3. You could have just said that as an answer to my question.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,057
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
A statute of limitations being suspended or withdrawn isn't an ex post facto law. Any prosecution after the statute is withdrawn is still a prosecution for an offence that was illegal at the time it was committed.
That such offences stopped being prosecuted after a certain date, doesn't mean that they weren't illegal when they occurred.
So if the relevant authorities decide that they will start prosecutions again at some point, that's entirely their prerogative.
An ex post facto law is a law that penalises behaviours that were not unlawful at the time they occurred. That's not what's happening here.
That such offences stopped being prosecuted after a certain date, doesn't mean that they weren't illegal when they occurred.
So if the relevant authorities decide that they will start prosecutions again at some point, that's entirely their prerogative.
An ex post facto law is a law that penalises behaviours that were not unlawful at the time they occurred. That's not what's happening here.
If you're not caught within X period of time you can't be prosecuted. How is changing that not changing the offense after you committed it?
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,057
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
If you are caught within X period of time, you can be prosecuted.
What is (or is not) illegal isn't changing at all. All that changes is the arbitrary value of X.
blastula
Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2006
- Messages
- 9,668
- Gender
- Late for dinner
- Basic Beliefs
- Gnostic atheist
Partial judgment granted before trial.
apnews.com
NEW YORK (AP) — A judge ruled Tuesday that Donald Trump committed fraud for years while building the real estate empire that catapulted him to fame and the White House.
Judge Arthur Engoron, ruling in a civil lawsuit brought by New York’s attorney general, found that the former president and his company deceived banks, insurers and others by massively overvaluing his assets and exaggerating his net worth on paperwork used in making deals and securing financing.
Engoron ordered that some of Trump’s business licenses be rescinded as punishment, making it difficult or impossible for them to do business in New York, and said he would continue to have an independent monitor oversee the Trump Organization’s operations.
Judge rules Donald Trump defrauded banks, insurers while building real estate empire
A judge has ruled that Donald Trump committed fraud for years while building the real estate empire that catapulted him to fame and the White House.
apnews.com
NEW YORK (AP) — A judge ruled Tuesday that Donald Trump committed fraud for years while building the real estate empire that catapulted him to fame and the White House.
Judge Arthur Engoron, ruling in a civil lawsuit brought by New York’s attorney general, found that the former president and his company deceived banks, insurers and others by massively overvaluing his assets and exaggerating his net worth on paperwork used in making deals and securing financing.
Engoron ordered that some of Trump’s business licenses be rescinded as punishment, making it difficult or impossible for them to do business in New York, and said he would continue to have an independent monitor oversee the Trump Organization’s operations.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 38,912
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
So the rapist also committed fraud.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 38,912
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Sounds like this is pretty much the end of Trump's New York empire, The judge has ordered the dissolution of his New York properties, possibly including his Trump Tower apartment.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 38,912
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
So they will kill themselves if Trump loses the 2024 election? Is that a promise?
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
There's so much attention paid to four criminal indictments against this heinous sociopath, that a recent ruling in a civil proceeding might be overlooked:
Cheerful Charlie
Contributor
Oh yes. Lose one for the gypper.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,222
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
What needs to be emphasized is that this is less a "judgment" and more a concession by the defense. Ultimately, the Judge is saying that no one is questioning the validity of the accusations... so we are skipping ahead in the trial to figure out the consequences of the uncontested guilt. IE, got to imagine this is going to be a settlement.