Okay but honestly its more like an alternate universe where unraveled has strong lawful good energy instead of the chaotic good that it has in this universe
You didn't mention it in your video, but the presumption of innocence hasn't always been the legal standard. In many countries throughout time, the accused was assumed guilty unless they could prove their innocence through evidence and testimony. Through that light, the statute of limitations makes even more sense: if your witnesses and evidence have gone away, how can you prove your innocence?
That could also explain why the Anglo-world doesn't have statutes of limitation on intentional homicide. Presumption of Innocence is a core component of Anglo-American law and thus the burden of proof falls on the accuser (the state) rather than the accused.
human bean not all homicide is illegal. There is a concept called "justifiable homicide" in which you HAD to kill them, usually self defense or defense of property. And while homicide is killing someone else, if you intend to kill someone in self defense, you "intended to homicide". But the self defense aspect means it isn't illegal and therefore you can't be charged with "intentional homicide".
This is exactly what we were taught in law school about criminal limitations: 1) Practical reasons, for organizing police efforts, allowing courts to focus on more recent crimes etc. 2) Fading of evidence 3) The criminal, after 15 or 20 years, is basically another person than the one who committed the crime
@@banana-uo3be Can we claim its resocialization purposes then ? That sounds more like revenge which is cited not to be a factor in favour of putting people behind bars? how is that possible then?
@@jakubrogacz6829 true. Extending their sentence also plays a part on why most of the outcome as soon as they are released is recidivism. So really, it's not helping at all. Maybe retributive justice wasn't really as effective as some people thought it would've been?
Heeeell yeah Grammah! You going *DOWN*!!! But really, do you remember that case about ten or so years back when that one Grandmother got pulled up and tried for being in the Manson Family in the 60's? This was like 50 years later, and she was a suburban book clubbin cookie masterin minivan kids to schoolin straight up grandma, but also used to be a total G and the law caught up. I don't think she was even involved in anything but the commune either. However DO NOT take that as fact. I don't clearly remember her level of involvement. I just remember that this indeed happened.
@@Rabbit-the-One Not sure what you're referring to. Unless she was one of the people claiming to be Charles Manson's heir after he died since there was a huge legal battle over that (Ask a Mortician has a great video on it). It wouldn't surprise me if the cops started looking back into some of them afterwards haha
@ Not neccesarily; greenland enjoys a great deal of autonomy despite being part of the Kingdom of Denmark. They have their own little parliment and are allowed to do a lot of their own legislation. The only subjects that I know for sure they have to bow to the will of the greater danish parliment are matters of foreign policy and national security
I still list i like reading as one of my most important personality traits, but i really just dont read that much anymore. The reason? School basically took the joy out of it. Out of everything requiring effort. Reading and programming.
I stopped reading for fun (unless I'm in school and done with my work) back in like 3rd grade because of all the assigned reading I had to do. I haven't touched an actual book for entertainment in years. I feel like school did that to me, but to be fair, I wouldn't be able to read at all if it wasn't for school.
In Norway there is an intersting conversation going on regarding statutes of limitations on crimes against children, especially abuse. Because they usually don't report the crimes until they are grown ups, so the crimes are "too old", even though the abuse is still affecting their lives (and they might still know their abuser).
Yes, this is a common problem with disasterous consequences. Until people understand PTSD more it is unlikely they will understand why it takes so long for us to face our fears.
They should definitely do that. At a young age I had been consistently abused and I can’t report anything because my own family didn’t believe me and made sure to gaslight me, belittle me and conceal all the evidence to protect a p3d0. I can’t sue now. It’s been too long and all the evidence has been destroyed.
@@mlem1042 problem is would it be good at larger scale. I personally know people who would use that law with impunity to get rid of people they personally dislike. And it was said in this very video, after 10 years there is no evidence for nor against. It turns into who sells better sob story. It would be catastrophic on large scale simply because liars exist.
@@jakubrogacz6829 the thing is this type of behaviour is repetitive. I don't feel bad for myself, whom I do feel bad for is all the little girls he could be harming right now. An average rapist rapes 6 victims. There are very likely newer cases than mine that could be used to provide background for my case and most importantly to get their cases going. I don't care about justice or revenge. What I do care about is removing him from the proximity of children as well as adults and generally any breathing thing. There are liars but of the 10% of cases that do get reported, only 0.5% of all allegations are thought to be false. (Btw only 10% of all cases get reported, how sad is that? A big reason why are cases like mine) I don't get depressed about me going through that. What I do get depressed about is how people like this get treated afterwards - gaslighting, disbelief and victim blaming. I don't want anyone else to have to go through that. There should be no such thing as limitations on crimes committed against children. Not to mention, there are cases in which there is video footage. It's sad but cases like this exist and at least these would be important to look into since there is evidence and very compelling evidence to say the least. Rape is a difficult crime to prove as is. Barely any rapist gets convicted, the last thing you have to worry about is false allegations since the victims are fighting against time and it is hard to prove a recent rape let alone a rape that happened like a decade ago. So basically what I am saying is it is nearly impossible to get anyone into prison for this unless it actually happened and the offender was being sloppy since there always has to be proof or at the very least a big amount of testimonies so no one person can put anyone in jail for a false allegation like this. This system protects rapists as is. Any victim deserves a chance to remove the danger no matter how long ago it happened. In fact, this is in your best interest since the same people they could be putting in jail could have raped you or your kids one day had something like this not been allowed. Keep in mind, the false allegations are the last thing you have to worry about. If somebody wants to accuse you of a crime you didn't do, they probably will not ever take it to the police. They will just shit talk you. You can be accused even if this is not an option. This only has benefits.
As a laywer, when you introduced the premis of this video I really gasped at the amount of work that you would have to put into figuring this out. (often the statute of limitations is dependent on the specific crime, so it's hard to get one number for every country) Also I would say that the main reason why we have this concept is to allow for legal certainty.
In the US it also depends on if you are charged at the state (and in which state) or federal level, they all have different laws and statues of limitations.
@@tomsoki5738 technically some former colonies that still recognise the queen as head of state, do have a statute of limitations, at least in civil cases (e.g. Australia).
@@tomsoki5738 It's only murder that doesn't have a statute of limitations, you can technically comment other crimes and get away with it if you lay low long enough in Britain and her ex-colonies.
The logic that limiting lawsuits prevents lawsuits acting on old beef also applies to crimes. Prevents the state from being like "nah I'll let it slide" towards your crimes, and then 20 years later you become outspoken against the state and the government being like "yeah we're gonna lock you up. Not for dissent, but for jaywalking ;)"
"im lazy" she says as she compiles a large excel document on statute of limitations of each country with variables accounted for and eventually makes a code that visually displays said information
Sabrina: *Litterally searches for every country's limitation period for murder* All intelligence agencies in the world: "Allow us to introduce ourselves..."
@@dbergerac9632yes, it's beautiful to see how someone can correct someone else on the internet and the other person just thanks and corrects their mistake. It's so beautiful it almost makes me think that there is hope for humanity.
Sabrina: *spends three days reading penal codes and compiling a spreadsheet* Also Sabrina: "I'm lazy." That word doesn't mean what you think it means 😂
It means exactly what she think it means. After all, a lazy person wouldn't want to spend too much time researching something, and laziness is a virtue, the less effort you have to do the work you need to do, the better. And efficiency and laziness go hand in hand. What you think laziness means, is a whole different matter, you think of eternal procrastination due to the lack of motivation or proper incitements. Or just that little word known as sloth, or apathy.
The Major yea, for most people laziness comes in spurts at a time. Therefore they don’t take on big accomplishments that would take a very very long time to accomplish because they know that they are occasionally lazy. Laziness can come in severe cases where you don’t wanna do anything at all, even live. And at that point it becomes a problem. But being periodically lazy is a normal occurrence, and so is over working yourself because you’re not lazy at all. How lazy you are can definitely affect your dreams and aspirations tho lol.
My thoughts on the matter: Limitations exist because exculpatory evidence can be lost. The police and prosecutors, for all practical purposes, have unlimited funds. They can create a story about you committing a crime 15 years ago. And you no longer have the hotel receipt showing you were in another state. You don't even remember exactly which hotel it was. Without limitations, you could go to jail for a crime you didn't commit.
Yeah if the witnesses who could have helped your defense have forgotten the important details or have died, then your defense becomes massively more difficult years later. Same goes for many other kinds of evidence as well.
havent finished the vid but i know for art crime: a HUGE part of it is that its often more important to the victim and cops to recover the item vs persecute whoever stole it. so, if a stolen painting is circulating but the museum is offering a reward for its return, the obvious reason that the thief never returns it is because they dont want to get caught... until they cant get caught anymore.
Main reason for statutes of limitations: Evidence can get mislaid over time, witnesses die, forget, etc. Also, presumption of innocence. Just because you're accused of a crime doesn't mean you're guilty.
Absolutely. I feel like this was framed as 'Person commits crime, then after a while they are forgiven for their crime', but the justice system isn't made up of criminals who've committed crimes - it's a system designed to detect, investigate, and prosecute crimes. It's not about giving the criminal a free pass, it's about telling the justice system to move on. 10, 20 years after a murder, the chances of the person you arrest being the wrong person just keep going up.
i get why it exists for crimes only involving adults but if a crime involves a child as the victim it shouldn't exist bc children typically wont report a crime until their older, especially if its committed by their parents (which most the time it is), because most the time they dont know how to or cannot report it
This was *such* a refreshing view on statute of limitations. As a criminology student, I'm normally bemoaning them when it comes to sexual assault or abuse cases.
@@rolandtowen2595 Wait... So in the US it's possible to do a rape kit - for which you have to seek help and everything - but that doesn't get tested? Do you have to press charges first, or is your process just so slow that the police just doesn't act on charges against an unknown perpetrator? Like, I thought that these cases only applied to women who did nothing for years, no testing or seeking official help, telling nobody, that thereby loose there chance to get justice - because they themselves sorta destroy the evidence in an attempt to forget. But this... this is terrible!
@@kathrinlindern2697 indeed, it is terrible. Due to a lack of laboratory workers/funding, police must make a choice between which kits are sent and which are not. As of yet, there is no way to track your rape kit the way one might track an Amazon package. Victims might never know that their kit remains untested.
I was genuinely surprised þat some people find murder to be worse þan rape, especially since murders receive love letters in prison and þe media makes þem out like fallen heroes while rapists are seen as þe worst possible scum. Personally I don't þink þat we should view sexual crimes as different from oþer crimes, and þe gender of þe victim should be irrelevant.
@@-haclong2366 Hey. I can tell that English isn't your first language. Replace the þ with th, it will make it easier for people to read. Also, I totally agree with you!
My cousin's and I were not able to have my case go to court for being molested by my cousin since some of the worse things happened to far back and they recent ones weren't enough for them to want to prosecute. It breaks my heart that a statute of limitation is on these things
"I stopped reading because school crushed my spirit" wow what an accurate description of the American education system! This is exactly what happened to me. Started in 8th grade when I got punished for reading because I read the book we were supposed to read in 1 quarter in 1 class period and wanted to read other things. I ended up reading the book ch1-end, then ch2-end, ch2-end etc.
Interesting to see you here, but it makes sense given how a Japanese doctor was imprisoned for murder after doing the first heart transplant, which is among the topics you are interested in
When I was a child I used to think that crimes expire because after decades without doing it again the person kinda just learned the lesson on their own
This really is a valid reason for it. Why punish someone if they've already gotten better? The only reason to punish them at that point is hatred/revenge (or what some people think as "justice") It's the same reason your old medical bills fall off your credit report. You're a different person.
@@NozomuYume Yes, people confuse justice and revenge a lot. A punishment is meant to rehabilitate, not for revenge. If there is nothing to rehabilitate anymore, then there is no need for a sentence. I'd still prefer they had a mandatory psychological evaluation though if the crime was murder or something on the same level.
@@almerakbar I don't think they confuse justice and revenge _that_ much. Well personally I don't think justice is a good thing, because justice is about "giving people what they deserve." So a kind of 'fair' revenge, but an unecessary one. I think we're often stuck with positive or negative connotations to a word (positive for justice) when in reality we should be more open-minded to changing our feeling about them. If you can't then you end up with situations where the meaning of a word changes, but the connotations stay. Or simply your opinion about the matter changes but you can't convince anyone because 'only an idiot would say justice is bad' Anyway, I started rambling
@@almerakbar rehabilitation AND protection. It's why e.g. Germany, mandatory sentences are not very high, compared to the US especially, but if you're deemed a threat to society, they may very well keep you inside anyway. But that's a constant evaluation, independent of the crimes you were sentenced for.
One thing that I think makes crimes expiring more fair is that if you commit the same crime again, you essentially restart the timer. So if you go 50 years without doing that crime again, you've essentially served almost a kind of soft probation.
I've been watching since your stint as a guest John on Vlogbrothers, and it has been really amazing to see your channel grow and change. I can only imagine the amount of work that went into this video, but it is beautiful and informative and I really appreciate it!
This video was recommended to me and I haven't seen any of her videos, but I definitely recognized her. Wouldn't have put together that she was on vlogbrothers since I haven't watched them in forever.
As a game designer, another valid reason is that the longer you wait to deliver negative feedback (in this case a prison sentence) the less meaningful that feedback is at influencing a persons behavior. If the goal is to rehabilitate the person who has committed the crime, there's little to no benefit to punishing that person after they forgot they even committed the crime, because while they are now dealing with the effect, they can no longer make a connection between it and the cause.
Your commitment to finding answers really is refreshing... thank you for sharing your learning with us and doing it in such a beautiful format. (You are the sort of nerd I can’t wait to grow up to be)
I am so happy I found your channel. First off the art is wonderful. Second, I think the way you talk is a perfect blend of knowledgeable and understandable, and on top of that you make your videos funny and interesting! I used to think I hated learning but that’s not true, I just always associated the word ‘learning’ with high school (very negative connotation if you can believe it.) videos like yours not only make learning fun, but it also inspires me and tons of others to branch out and think in new ways, or explore new thoughts. Great video, Keep doing what you’re doing, and thank you for your dedication! 🥰🌸❤️
Your animation is on POINT. Also just kudos on your ability to make such slick and well-polished content even when there's some rough and ready elements to it. Like, seriously you got some low res shots and that iffy keying and yet I'm still here like "Damn, did someone mess up and upload this Netflix docu-short to RUclips?"
Yeah, it would be so cool if they had some sort of vlog or streaming channel for less-effort videos that record their progress/process. I would watch that.
Kenton Benoit Please be nice. While personally I doubt I would have enough patience to watch through what they’re suggesting, please at least be nice about it!
Classic joke move back in model UN days: The delegate from the United States poses a question to the floor: "If Turkey invaded Djibouti would Greece be involved?"
I really hope you get the chance to submit these for some college project or something... the professor would be like: "is there a letter grade above A?!"
I'm stunned that there are places where the statute of limitations on *murder* is only *ten years.* Things that happened ten years ago don't feel "long ago" to me at all. If I had a family member who was murdered ten years ago, I can't imagine having the killer be able to walk up to me, say they did it, and then walk away without me having any legal recourse. I also like that the first limitation law was literally: "Finders keepers. Losers weepers."
10 years is a long time for a body, a crime scene & witnesses though. very few people can accurately remember what happened 10 years ago, crime scenes change & may just not exist anymore & it's difficult to establish evidence from a body after it is a skeleton, especially evidence that would link someone to the crime. i think murder probably shouldn't have a statute, but it's more abt just that it's borderline impossible to get accurate evidence after a decade & less that murder obviously effects loved ones for life. statute should be longer if guilt can be definitively proved, but it's just hard to get evidence & convict someone after 10 years. memories get fuzzy & places change, so testimony that would be damning 10 years ago just can't be anymore. someone's recollection that places another at the scene is a lot more credible a week after than a decade after. 10 years is way too short in terms of other pros of statute (like being unlikely to commit the crime again, being likely to disclose important information, etc) but in terms of effective evidence it's just too long
"I always assumed that the law was more reactive to modern climates" *laughs in homosexuality illegal in 40 of 53 commonwealth countries thanks to the one same penal code*
For reference: "The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary association of 54 sovereign states. Nearly all of them are former British colonies or dependencies of those colonies. No one government in the Commonwealth exercises power over the others, as is the case in a political union. Rather, the Commonwealth is an international organization in which countries with diverse social, political, and economic backgrounds are regarded as equal in status, and cooperate within a framework of common values and goals, as outlined in the Singapore Declaration issued in 1971.[1] Such common values and goals include the promotion of democracy, human rights, good governance, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality before the law, free trade, multilateralism, and world peace, which are promoted through multilateral projects and meetings, such as the Commonwealth Games, held once every four years."
Perhaps the climates of said countries aren't very modern? Unfortunately, over the past decade or so, we've seen many countries across the world move towards a much more dated political climate.
I don't think you represented the meaning of derek parfit's statement very well. At least to my understanding, he's saying that after a long time has passed, it is actually immorral to punish the person. Even if you could prove exactly with a fair trial that they did commit the crime. And that is because that person has changed so much that they aren't the same person that committed the crime anymore.
Yeah, that's how I took that quote. I'm not sure I fully agree with it, but I think it makes a lot of sense for minor crimes. For someone who stole a candy bar as a kid, they're obviously a different person now.
which is a hilariously stupid idea. A person who got away with a crime does not develop into a better person. There are no exceptions to this rule. And the victim is not healed in any way just because the perpetrator has changed. It is immoral to let a murder live. There are no exceptions. Their victim did not have the opportunity to grow and change, the murderer must die, and any who would allow that monster to live will burn for all eternity in hell for sheer moral corruption.
@@zilvoxidgod Remember, the point of a sentence is to rehabilitate, not for avenging the victim. If the murderer is now a productive and sensible member of society, then there is nothing left to rehabilitate.
@@zilvoxidgod Further adding onto everything else said above me, why is more murder the response to murder? Murdering the murderer removes any chances at rehabilitation or otherwise punishment because the only punishment is... Death? If you murder someone, you're likely not going to care about being killed beyond the base human instinct of not wanting to die. A better punishment is to ensure they never do it again while also trying to ensure the person actually faced punishment for what they've done, but as we've already established, murderers who receive the death sentence often do not care if they die. A better punishment is long and enduring, trying to rehabilitate them so the murdered's death means something.
@@almerakbar Fines are punishments not rehabilitation. Prisons however are for many things... Punishments, rehabilitation or keeping harmful people away from others. Many don't agree on which we should prioritise or even which are legitimate reasons.
Thank you, Brian David Gilbert of Crime, for this fascinating explanation of how to maximise my chances of getting away with murder so long as I have the money to travel to somewhere not colonised by the British
Thank you so much for this Video! I discovered the statute of limitations watching Itaewon class, episode 3. I am always after the "why"s and could not resist finding out what this meant. I am deeply Grateful for the amount of knowledge people like you collect, summarize and make it fun to read. People call you nerds but I call you a hero. Thank you so much Ms
As much as I appreciate the philosophy and do apply it as a truth pertaining to attempting to hold someone accountable for a crime they've long since moved past, the existence of statutes of limitations are purely practical from a legal standpoint. The concern you brought up is a valid one. No matter the crime, citizens are entitled in most cases to due process, and that gets muddier when dealing with certain felony lengths such as 6 years. Evidence is still needed, and in lack of physical proof, that relies on witness testimony, which can deteriorate more and more as the length from the crime passes on, people move, people die, etc. At that point, prosecuting the crime becomes nearly impossible in some cases. The statute is far longer than it needs to be, but that's only a buffer for when new evidence in a case DOES appear. But the overall end result is less glamorous than even that. Court systems around the world have varying degrees of success managing the crimes that are committed in today's world, whether it be the odd Karen assault or criminal act irresponsibly posted to social media, Often, there can be months of court and legal man hours sunk into charges that may not even go anywhere by the end of it. The last thing any court system under that pressure wants, is to have to try a 2-3 year old case with details puzzle pieced together from spotty witness accounts and deteriorating evidence. A case like that would probably take twice as long to prosecute if there's even a halfway decent enough legal defense to provide enough reasonable doubt assertions to land an acquittal, then good old double jeopardy sinks in and the entire prosecution effort was all but wasted, even if the accused was proven to be guilty later on. The written statute of limitation is just the final cutoff for the courts to say "This is out of our hands now". They don't want to waste court time figuring out progressively blurrier cases when they still have their hands full with the cut and dry cases with full camera footage proof that the Karen defendant INSISTS on pleading Not Guilty to. Tenets of this nature even exist in civil cases. For example, the Theodosius II declaration you made mention of is similar to the core of Adverse Possession. Despite how it gets commonly abused, the core of idea is that if someone lives in a home or has used a piece of land like their own for a significant period of time, it should be reasonably expected that everyone nearby believes that property is theirs, regardless of the misunderstandings that may have preceded it. It becomes chaotic when an entity suddenly comes out of nowhere and asserts that they own something when they haven't been responsible for maintaining it, improving it, or in extreme cases, not even paying property taxes.on what they claim is theirs. Courts and lawyers don't need to be rifling through worn out letters between Grandpappy and Old Lady Wilkins about some informal arrangement where Wilkins is allowed to live on the other side of 10 acres of land in exchange for feeding the hens and babysitting on Thursdays. So they put a cap to the time one has to raise a complaint about disputes of this nature, mostly because the truth can get buried once one generation passes on and leaves things to the next based on assumptions. Obviously, the next person to occupy the shack shouldn't be punished for their lack of knowledge and inactivity from the land owners, causing these things to apply under basis of common sense. I.e. if you own something, act like it. The last reason is a rare one, but still applies as well, and that is that the law, both criminal and civil, can be constantly changing. Obviously if something is legal when it's committed and made illegal later, it's not reasonable to say you should be tried for it. Vice versa, if something is illegal, and later becomes legal, you also can't reasonably be expected to be tried for it now that it's no longer tried as a crime. But the thing is, the minutiae and finer procedures of dealing with criminal cases and civil procedures can have a lot happen to them with a couple of years time. Just think of all the mandates that went in effect during 2020 that had real enforceable consequences like fines and sentencing. Eventually, these kinds of mandates will be dissolved, and it's not going to be reasonable for someone to pull out some camera footage from the time showing someone violating one of these measures, even in as little as a few months from the time the measure was lifted. Smaller changes than that could be made to things as simple as "what is allowed as admissible evidence" that could radically change how these cases are handled, DNA being used as forensic evidence is as modern as the mid 1980s, but it'd be difficult to imagine trying to extract DNA evidence from cases where the crime scene has been cleared up and there were fewer concerns about proper forensic handling. That's no different to things happening now that we may discover solutions for a decade in the future. Procedures will have long since evolved to a point where the methods are no longer compatible, and there may be no more use trying to force it. I did like the video and it does provide a lot of room for thought, but sometimes the WHY isn't just one big thing, but a lot of small things.
I couldn't sue my doctor for botching my surgery because the limitations came up, even though the symptoms didn't show until a few years after the surgery; the statute was 3 years post surgery. I'm stuck with those side effects forever and I have to pay to have the surgery done again 🙃
The limitation period generally begins when the plaintiff's cause of action accrues, meaning the date upon which the plaintiff is first able to maintain the cause of action in court, or when the plaintiff first becomes aware of a previous injury (for example, occupational lung diseases such as asbestosis).
Worrying about what people “deserve” has always seemed problematic to me. Just worry about what will make the future better. Often those things that will make the future better align with what we think people deserve.
Here's the problem with that idea. It gives the power to people who do bad things because as long as they do bad things in such a way that punishing them is not worth it they can keep doing bad things. In the long run worrying about the future means worrying about what people deserve.
@@DIVAD291 The two have some overlap of course, but they aren't identical. Worrying about what's best for the future *must include* worrying about keeping people from doing bad things again and again. Since that's part of the future. But this video revolves specifically around people who *didn't* abuse the fact they weren't punished to do more crimes. If they did, it would be irrelevant if their old crimes were ignored, as they'd have plenty of newer ones.
@@DIVAD291 If a person commits murder, it shows they are willing to commit murder, so there's a high risk they will perform another murder. This risk is bad for society, so we lock them up until we deem them low risk. I live in a country that has a focus on rehabilitation. But if someone commits murder but has lived without doing another crime for 30 years, then they have demonstrated that they can get by legally and don't have any particular urge to commit crime, so it's assumed they have rehabilitated themselves, as they get along with society.
As an attorney… I appreciate that you had the question and then took the time to really, really figure it out. I mean, I know that’s kind of the point of this channel, but I still enjoyed the effort. (Also, the quote you used explaining statutes of limitations? I’ve literally used it in a brief before, though while arguing about laches rather than SOLs.) Edit: also, I love that the first limitations law you found was a property law. Fucking property law. It’s a nightmare.
It's also a special kind of principle witness regulation. When your crimes are forgiven, then maybe that will lead you to reveal some information which helps punish worse crimes, retrieve valuables or prevent further physical harm. In Germany and Japan there's a saying "Mord verjährt nicht" which means that intentional homicide does never expire, but also implies, that pretty much every other crime does expire. The above reason and the fact that our principle witness regulations are pretty weak explain part of why we should let all other crimes expire.
I have no idea how/why RUclips algorithm decided to put this channel on my suggestions. But I'm soooooo thankful for it !! You spend some serious efforts in your videos, while making research feel as cool as it should :) Also given the very wide variety of topics you cover in your videos, gives one confidence that they can look up things that they previously didn't have much knowledge about and actually come out with usable information/tools. Thanks so much for this content :)
100% agree. Now murder should never expire, but yes you’re absolutely a different, person. If you have a soul, you have to live with that crime in your head everyday, sometimes your mind can be much worse then any prison.
@@xphonegaminginc.6310 "If you have a soul, you have to live with that crime in your head everyday, sometimes your mind can be much worse then any prison." That assumes you are an empathetic person. There are people out there who can kill another person and not feel any bad about it.
Love that the netherlands has the rule that if you do something and it becomes illegal after you wont be charged. As well as that if you were ruled innocent by the highest court that they cannot bother you about it anymore (exept they added something about being able to go back to heavy crimes like murder)
I've recently started watching stuff from this channel. The way its done makes me.feel nostalgic for some old kids shows I used to watch. Not sure why.
Wow, this video was just really impressive. I've gotten so used to having youtube videos only vaguely sort of touch the subject that is the premise for the video. This, this was not that. I loved this, it was super cool and interesting! This made me excited about going back to start my next semester at university
Hearing that the person call themselves lazy although they spend three days searching information to show something to people... it's pain, you are cool, i love you
It makes sense to me - if someone commits a crime and the statute of limitations runs out, that often means they weren't out committing worse/repeat offenses, or they didn't cause enough of a problem for law enforcement to get involved. At worst, they're constantly on the run from law enforcement, but at least that life is kind of a punishment in and of itself.
I just realized that your voice is so clear that I don’t need captions. I dunno why that makes me giddy, but it does. (Ps: your voice is also super calming.)
Oh I've learned about this once. The study I read talked about how if you punish someone too late the effect wont work and the only reason to do it is moral rage.
This video has big BDG unraveled energy tbh
god bless the man who saved Polygon.. well. monster factory too
Could not ask for a better energy.
Okay but honestly its more like an alternate universe where unraveled has strong lawful good energy instead of the chaotic good that it has in this universe
Didn't waste/use enough paper.
Hey you should try to get hired by VOX News😃
You didn't mention it in your video, but the presumption of innocence hasn't always been the legal standard. In many countries throughout time, the accused was assumed guilty unless they could prove their innocence through evidence and testimony.
Through that light, the statute of limitations makes even more sense: if your witnesses and evidence have gone away, how can you prove your innocence?
That could also explain why the Anglo-world doesn't have statutes of limitation on intentional homicide. Presumption of Innocence is a core component of Anglo-American law and thus the burden of proof falls on the accuser (the state) rather than the accused.
Ian Neufeld ruclips.net/video/Js-soWMnTVc/видео.html
@@peregry that and the UK doesn't have a statute of limitation on anything
wasn’t that the point of the video, you lose the “right to a fair trial”
Ian Neufeld i love your foto
"intentional homicide means you intended to homicide" good that's cleared up now
Not really because intending to homicide does not meet the requirements of intentional homicide.
@@thomasknight604 wat
human bean not all homicide is illegal. There is a concept called "justifiable homicide" in which you HAD to kill them, usually self defense or defense of property. And while homicide is killing someone else, if you intend to kill someone in self defense, you "intended to homicide". But the self defense aspect means it isn't illegal and therefore you can't be charged with "intentional homicide".
I still don't understand, more explanation needed
@@themadlad_ intentional homicide is first or second degree murder. Intending to homicide is attempted murder. Different charges.
This is exactly what we were taught in law school about criminal limitations:
1) Practical reasons, for organizing police efforts, allowing courts to focus on more recent crimes etc.
2) Fading of evidence
3) The criminal, after 15 or 20 years, is basically another person than the one who committed the crime
3 is basically why I think almost all prison sentences should be under 10-15 years. Including violent crimes.
@@cadekachelmeier7251 idk man, some crimes are too cruel to be forgiven in such a short period of time.
@@banana-uo3be Can we claim its resocialization purposes then ? That sounds more like revenge which is cited not to be a factor in favour of putting people behind bars? how is that possible then?
@@jakubrogacz6829 true. Extending their sentence also plays a part on why most of the outcome as soon as they are released is recidivism. So really, it's not helping at all. Maybe retributive justice wasn't really as effective as some people thought it would've been?
@@cadekachelmeier7251 All rape, murder, or anything like that should be immediate death penalty, no exceptions.
The reason limitations exist: Are you seriously gonna put someone's kind and loving grandma in prison because she used to sell drugs back in the 60s?
Heeeell yeah Grammah! You going *DOWN*!!! But really, do you remember that case about ten or so years back when that one Grandmother got pulled up and tried for being in the Manson Family in the 60's? This was like 50 years later, and she was a suburban book clubbin cookie masterin minivan kids to schoolin straight up grandma, but also used to be a total G and the law caught up. I don't think she was even involved in anything but the commune either. However DO NOT take that as fact. I don't clearly remember her level of involvement. I just remember that this indeed happened.
@@Rabbit-the-One Not sure what you're referring to. Unless she was one of the people claiming to be Charles Manson's heir after he died since there was a huge legal battle over that (Ask a Mortician has a great video on it). It wouldn't surprise me if the cops started looking back into some of them afterwards haha
ickibot geez what god forsaken country do you live in?
@@EGlVM OP specifically said for selling drugs 50+ years ago... Not murder!
Plus old people are expensive to house in prison. That’s why they get early releases.
"I forgot about Greenland"
sounds like every virus in plague INC
@ Not neccesarily; greenland enjoys a great deal of autonomy despite being part of the Kingdom of Denmark. They have their own little parliment and are allowed to do a lot of their own legislation. The only subjects that I know for sure they have to bow to the will of the greater danish parliment are matters of foreign policy and national security
freakymoejoe2 i’m from greenland and it’s the same laws as in denmark
Sabrina is a virus confirmed
@M Y N W O R D lmao
Lol I actually figured out a strategy to basically always win Plague INC so I eventually got bored and deleted it XD
6:54 "I used to go the library when I was a kid, but then i stopped reading because school crushed my spirit..."
-Sabrina
I felt that
Same
I still list i like reading as one of my most important personality traits, but i really just dont read that much anymore. The reason? School basically took the joy out of it. Out of everything requiring effort. Reading and programming.
I stopped reading for fun (unless I'm in school and done with my work) back in like 3rd grade because of all the assigned reading I had to do. I haven't touched an actual book for entertainment in years. I feel like school did that to me, but to be fair, I wouldn't be able to read at all if it wasn't for school.
Jan 1 2020, anything is possible. 2020: everything happened.
dbergerac "never went to the gym? now you can!" was a little too funny
2020: "HOLD MY BEER"
WAIT NO WE DIDN'T MEAN IT LIKE THAT!
@@MollyAhern "now you can't"
2021 : well yes, but no...
In Norway there is an intersting conversation going on regarding statutes of limitations on crimes against children, especially abuse. Because they usually don't report the crimes until they are grown ups, so the crimes are "too old", even though the abuse is still affecting their lives (and they might still know their abuser).
Yes, this is a common problem with disasterous consequences. Until people understand PTSD more it is unlikely they will understand why it takes so long for us to face our fears.
They should definitely do that. At a young age I had been consistently abused and I can’t report anything because my own family didn’t believe me and made sure to gaslight me, belittle me and conceal all the evidence to protect a p3d0. I can’t sue now. It’s been too long and all the evidence has been destroyed.
@@mlem1042 problem is would it be good at larger scale. I personally know people who would use that law with impunity to get rid of people they personally dislike. And it was said in this very video, after 10 years there is no evidence for nor against. It turns into who sells better sob story. It would be catastrophic on large scale simply because liars exist.
@@jakubrogacz6829 the thing is this type of behaviour is repetitive. I don't feel bad for myself, whom I do feel bad for is all the little girls he could be harming right now. An average rapist rapes 6 victims. There are very likely newer cases than mine that could be used to provide background for my case and most importantly to get their cases going. I don't care about justice or revenge. What I do care about is removing him from the proximity of children as well as adults and generally any breathing thing. There are liars but of the 10% of cases that do get reported, only 0.5% of all allegations are thought to be false. (Btw only 10% of all cases get reported, how sad is that? A big reason why are cases like mine) I don't get depressed about me going through that. What I do get depressed about is how people like this get treated afterwards - gaslighting, disbelief and victim blaming. I don't want anyone else to have to go through that. There should be no such thing as limitations on crimes committed against children. Not to mention, there are cases in which there is video footage. It's sad but cases like this exist and at least these would be important to look into since there is evidence and very compelling evidence to say the least. Rape is a difficult crime to prove as is. Barely any rapist gets convicted, the last thing you have to worry about is false allegations since the victims are fighting against time and it is hard to prove a recent rape let alone a rape that happened like a decade ago. So basically what I am saying is it is nearly impossible to get anyone into prison for this unless it actually happened and the offender was being sloppy since there always has to be proof or at the very least a big amount of testimonies so no one person can put anyone in jail for a false allegation like this. This system protects rapists as is. Any victim deserves a chance to remove the danger no matter how long ago it happened. In fact, this is in your best interest since the same people they could be putting in jail could have raped you or your kids one day had something like this not been allowed. Keep in mind, the false allegations are the last thing you have to worry about. If somebody wants to accuse you of a crime you didn't do, they probably will not ever take it to the police. They will just shit talk you. You can be accused even if this is not an option. This only has benefits.
@@jakubrogacz6829 I am sorry that the comment is so long, I am drunk right now and didn't know how to shorten it.
As a laywer, when you introduced the premis of this video I really gasped at the amount of work that you would have to put into figuring this out. (often the statute of limitations is dependent on the specific crime, so it's hard to get one number for every country) Also I would say that the main reason why we have this concept is to allow for legal certainty.
Can you make that sped sheet availabe? It's so good lol
In the US it also depends on if you are charged at the state (and in which state) or federal level, they all have different laws and statues of limitations.
So the phrase "its not illegal if you don't get caught" Is legally speaking accurate.
Only after a couple of years though
Not if your in the UK or any of the ex British colonies haha
@@tomsoki5738 technically some former colonies that still recognise the queen as head of state, do have a statute of limitations, at least in civil cases (e.g. Australia).
Wrong. It's still illegal. It's just un-punishable after a certain period of time.
@@tomsoki5738 It's only murder that doesn't have a statute of limitations, you can technically comment other crimes and get away with it if you lay low long enough in Britain and her ex-colonies.
That database is?? So pretty??? We love a good color-coded chart.
You're a saint for putting this together omg
we? How many of you are between your ears?
SarahAnnRose23 ruclips.net/video/Js-soWMnTVc/видео.html
Same question. We?
I hereby accept your we. I love stats and charts, there are now atleast two of us
A good coloured chart makes it so much easier to read
The logic that limiting lawsuits prevents lawsuits acting on old beef also applies to crimes. Prevents the state from being like "nah I'll let it slide" towards your crimes, and then 20 years later you become outspoken against the state and the government being like "yeah we're gonna lock you up. Not for dissent, but for jaywalking ;)"
"im lazy" she says as she compiles a large excel document on statute of limitations of each country with variables accounted for and eventually makes a code that visually displays said information
I am pretty sure it was google sheets but...
IDK why i brothered to correct you
Also at that time I was attending an online course about excel so maybe that's why, lol
This is the kind of laziness i strive for
Doing sheets is fun.
typical INTP behaviour while hyperfocusing ^^'
Sabrina: *Litterally searches for every country's limitation period for murder*
All intelligence agencies in the world: "Allow us to introduce ourselves..."
I seriously don't wanna be that person, but it's really bothering me... I politely correct your spelling; *introduce
@@enbyfabulosity2521 thx
THAT can really happen. I've seen it.
@@dbergerac9632yes, it's beautiful to see how someone can correct someone else on the internet and the other person just thanks and corrects their mistake. It's so beautiful it almost makes me think that there is hope for humanity.
@@AllNiin I'm old. I miss civility and manners. We should bring those back.
its crazy how quickly you can tell someone is interested in what theyre talking about and not just doing it for content.
Sabrina: *spends three days reading penal codes and compiling a spreadsheet*
Also Sabrina: "I'm lazy."
That word doesn't mean what you think it means 😂
It means exactly what she think it means. After all, a lazy person wouldn't want to spend too much time researching something, and laziness is a virtue, the less effort you have to do the work you need to do, the better.
And efficiency and laziness go hand in hand.
What you think laziness means, is a whole different matter, you think of eternal procrastination due to the lack of motivation or proper incitements. Or just that little word known as sloth, or apathy.
The Major yea, for most people laziness comes in spurts at a time. Therefore they don’t take on big accomplishments that would take a very very long time to accomplish because they know that they are occasionally lazy. Laziness can come in severe cases where you don’t wanna do anything at all, even live. And at that point it becomes a problem. But being periodically lazy is a normal occurrence, and so is over working yourself because you’re not lazy at all. How lazy you are can definitely affect your dreams and aspirations tho lol.
As one myself
Lazy hardworkers exist
You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
Sounds like ADHD
My thoughts on the matter:
Limitations exist because exculpatory evidence can be lost. The police and prosecutors, for all practical purposes, have unlimited funds. They can create a story about you committing a crime 15 years ago. And you no longer have the hotel receipt showing you were in another state. You don't even remember exactly which hotel it was. Without limitations, you could go to jail for a crime you didn't commit.
Interesting possibility.
what are your thoughts on the UK? we don't have any sort of statute of limitations here so crimes can be prosecuted even 50 years later.
@@skellious
I think it is almost certain that they jail innocents.
Yeah if the witnesses who could have helped your defense have forgotten the important details or have died, then your defense becomes massively more difficult years later. Same goes for many other kinds of evidence as well.
This makes sense especially back when everything was paper and nothing was long-lived
havent finished the vid but i know for art crime: a HUGE part of it is that its often more important to the victim and cops to recover the item vs persecute whoever stole it. so, if a stolen painting is circulating but the museum is offering a reward for its return, the obvious reason that the thief never returns it is because they dont want to get caught... until they cant get caught anymore.
3:02 I'm sorry, but I keep mishearing "you should live in the booty"
What did she actually say? Dubai?
@@Nigarj Djibouti, a country in East Africa
@@muyou6589 Isn't it pronounced like "ji-boot-ee", not "di-boot-ee"? I think that's part of the confusion
UNDERATED!!
@@eliza8514 Yes, it is pronounced "ji-boo-tee"
“In Dabooty” sounds like a whole other crime
Intrigue
Penal codes in "Dabooty"
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 well played
Degdeg so it’s a medieval society?
@Degdeg """justice"""
"I love libraries. I used to go all the time when I was a kid, but then I stopped reading, because school crushed my spirit"
Many nods of agreement.
Main reason for statutes of limitations: Evidence can get mislaid over time, witnesses die, forget, etc. Also, presumption of innocence. Just because you're accused of a crime doesn't mean you're guilty.
I think the real main reason is to avoid the number of active cases going infinite.
Absolutely. I feel like this was framed as 'Person commits crime, then after a while they are forgiven for their crime', but the justice system isn't made up of criminals who've committed crimes - it's a system designed to detect, investigate, and prosecute crimes. It's not about giving the criminal a free pass, it's about telling the justice system to move on. 10, 20 years after a murder, the chances of the person you arrest being the wrong person just keep going up.
i get why it exists for crimes only involving adults but if a crime involves a child as the victim it shouldn't exist bc children typically wont report a crime until their older, especially if its committed by their parents (which most the time it is), because most the time they dont know how to or cannot report it
This was *such* a refreshing view on statute of limitations. As a criminology student, I'm normally bemoaning them when it comes to sexual assault or abuse cases.
Do you think a fair trial that leads to an actual conviction can be possible after that time for charges like sexual assault or abuse?
@@rolandtowen2595 Wait... So in the US it's possible to do a rape kit - for which you have to seek help and everything - but that doesn't get tested? Do you have to press charges first, or is your process just so slow that the police just doesn't act on charges against an unknown perpetrator? Like, I thought that these cases only applied to women who did nothing for years, no testing or seeking official help, telling nobody, that thereby loose there chance to get justice - because they themselves sorta destroy the evidence in an attempt to forget. But this... this is terrible!
@@kathrinlindern2697 indeed, it is terrible. Due to a lack of laboratory workers/funding, police must make a choice between which kits are sent and which are not. As of yet, there is no way to track your rape kit the way one might track an Amazon package. Victims might never know that their kit remains untested.
I was genuinely surprised þat some people find murder to be worse þan rape, especially since murders receive love letters in prison and þe media makes þem out like fallen heroes while rapists are seen as þe worst possible scum. Personally I don't þink þat we should view sexual crimes as different from oþer crimes, and þe gender of þe victim should be irrelevant.
@@-haclong2366 Hey. I can tell that English isn't your first language. Replace the þ with th, it will make it easier for people to read.
Also, I totally agree with you!
My cousin's and I were not able to have my case go to court for being molested by my cousin since some of the worse things happened to far back and they recent ones weren't enough for them to want to prosecute. It breaks my heart that a statute of limitation is on these things
Yep. You're very strong & you did very well by reporting. 17years on & I'm still not ready
There are indeed some crimes that either definitely shouldn't, or probably shouldn't, have SoL's.
Sexual crimes are on that list.
People who don’t read the description with all of its tasty sources and puns have remorse
this comment made me realize I forgot to change the code word from my last video so... oops (you get imaginary bonus points for it).
youtuber who includes sources, amazing
Sabrina that was a fowl pun
@@answerinprogress remorse
"...and then i stopped reading because school crushed my spirit" Oof that hurts because it's so relatable...
"I stopped reading because school crushed my spirit" wow what an accurate description of the American education system! This is exactly what happened to me. Started in 8th grade when I got punished for reading because I read the book we were supposed to read in 1 quarter in 1 class period and wanted to read other things. I ended up reading the book ch1-end, then ch2-end, ch2-end etc.
@@-XtraCredit- Nah, I only told her when she "caught" me reading something else. She was a control freak
Amazing piece of work.
Heyyyy I am your fan
Interesting to see you here, but it makes sense given how a Japanese doctor was imprisoned for murder after doing the first heart transplant, which is among the topics you are interested in
Found Medlife Crisis in the wild!
When I was a child I used to think that crimes expire because after decades without doing it again the person kinda just learned the lesson on their own
This really is a valid reason for it. Why punish someone if they've already gotten better? The only reason to punish them at that point is hatred/revenge (or what some people think as "justice")
It's the same reason your old medical bills fall off your credit report. You're a different person.
@@NozomuYume Yes, people confuse justice and revenge a lot. A punishment is meant to rehabilitate, not for revenge. If there is nothing to rehabilitate anymore, then there is no need for a sentence. I'd still prefer they had a mandatory psychological evaluation though if the crime was murder or something on the same level.
@@almerakbar
I don't think they confuse justice and revenge _that_ much. Well personally I don't think justice is a good thing, because justice is about "giving people what they deserve." So a kind of 'fair' revenge, but an unecessary one. I think we're often stuck with positive or negative connotations to a word (positive for justice) when in reality we should be more open-minded to changing our feeling about them. If you can't then you end up with situations where the meaning of a word changes, but the connotations stay. Or simply your opinion about the matter changes but you can't convince anyone because 'only an idiot would say justice is bad'
Anyway, I started rambling
@@almerakbar rehabilitation AND protection. It's why e.g. Germany, mandatory sentences are not very high, compared to the US especially, but if you're deemed a threat to society, they may very well keep you inside anyway. But that's a constant evaluation, independent of the crimes you were sentenced for.
One thing that I think makes crimes expiring more fair is that if you commit the same crime again, you essentially restart the timer.
So if you go 50 years without doing that crime again, you've essentially served almost a kind of soft probation.
If you don't restart the timer. You have a second timer.
@whitelichmage7004
There's no limitations on murder. There's still limitations on arson and rape. Probably manslaughter.
Can't believe it took me this long to realize you remind of Chidi from the Good Place
this was because of the library segment, wasn't it?
@@icymoons Just how she speaks and acts in general
Deon Pyle-Williams UR RIGHT
“Put the peeps in the chili pot and add the m&m’s.”
Omg yes
"I'm lazy" she says, having done hours upon hours of research for an 11 minute video
She said she spent 3 days reading up on penal codes..
and that’s not counting the time spent filming, editing, rendering...
procrastination does wonders
Colonies: talks about Spain but not Portugal. Another sad day for us
Talked about Russia colonies and not about portuguese ones
I've been watching since your stint as a guest John on Vlogbrothers, and it has been really amazing to see your channel grow and change. I can only imagine the amount of work that went into this video, but it is beautiful and informative and I really appreciate it!
I agree and share the sentiment! Thank you for saying the thing +
This video was recommended to me and I haven't seen any of her videos, but I definitely recognized her. Wouldn't have put together that she was on vlogbrothers since I haven't watched them in forever.
Oh right and i just remembered that she was a host on Crash Course kids too!
As a game designer, another valid reason is that the longer you wait to deliver negative feedback (in this case a prison sentence) the less meaningful that feedback is at influencing a persons behavior. If the goal is to rehabilitate the person who has committed the crime, there's little to no benefit to punishing that person after they forgot they even committed the crime, because while they are now dealing with the effect, they can no longer make a connection between it and the cause.
4:29
Sabrina: "I'm lazy"
Also Sabrina: *painstakingly records the statutes of limitations of over 190 countries for a RUclips video*
Now I'm tempted to gather a list for some of the more well know crimes. All of them would be waayyyyy too hard.
Lol
Your commitment to finding answers really is refreshing... thank you for sharing your learning with us and doing it in such a beautiful format. (You are the sort of nerd I can’t wait to grow up to be)
Stellvia Hoenheim calm down, incel
Stellvia Hoenheim yikes did the girl in your chess club reject you again? It’s alright buddy, your right hand will never wrong you
I am so happy I found your channel. First off the art is wonderful. Second, I think the way you talk is a perfect blend of knowledgeable and understandable, and on top of that you make your videos funny and interesting! I used to think I hated learning but that’s not true, I just always associated the word ‘learning’ with high school (very negative connotation if you can believe it.) videos like yours not only make learning fun, but it also inspires me and tons of others to branch out and think in new ways, or explore new thoughts. Great video, Keep doing what you’re doing, and thank you for your dedication! 🥰🌸❤️
"I'm lazy" complies giant spreadsheet with the statute of limitation for every country (except greenland)
I'm fairly certain it's the same as Denmark, since it is part of the Danish Realm
@@filemot25 Yeah Greenland ain't a country
I wouldn't call it lazy, I'd call it "choosing to narrow research so you don't die"
Your animation is on POINT.
Also just kudos on your ability to make such slick and well-polished content even when there's some rough and ready elements to it. Like, seriously you got some low res shots and that iffy keying and yet I'm still here like "Damn, did someone mess up and upload this Netflix docu-short to RUclips?"
oh, yeah REMORSE
Your videos are so well put together. The animation, the lighting, the transitions, the script, the EFFORT gives me life.
idk if I'm in a small minority, but I think it would be cool to see how your process in making these videos from start to finish.
I'd like to see that too- it still amazes me how much effort you guys put into each video :)
Yeah, it would be so cool if they had some sort of vlog or streaming channel for less-effort videos that record their progress/process. I would watch that.
Shut your fuckin mouth please 😒
Kenton Benoit Please be nice.
While personally I doubt I would have enough patience to watch through what they’re suggesting, please at least be nice about it!
@@kentonbenoit9629 no u
I love that you called “Djibouti” “Da Booty”
i mean the pronouciation was almost correct
Classic joke move back in model UN days: The delegate from the United States poses a question to the floor: "If Turkey invaded Djibouti would Greece be involved?"
The lawyer in me had a FIELD DAY with you say... @ around the 2:25 minute mark, only got better from there 🤣
*OMG IT'S TIME. WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR YOU TO COME BACK ILYSM*
The amount of research she has done for a 12 minutes is mind-blowing
as a non-native speaker: thank you soooooo much for the subtitles, they help a lot
I really hope you get the chance to submit these for some college project or something... the professor would be like: "is there a letter grade above A?!"
The letter above A would be S rank.
omgggg imagine in the future you get an SS instead of an A+
the jdlt
SS 800pp
@@thatoneguy9582 nice
@@junedanieltamor9071 The jews really feel that
2:49 Thank you for being that nerd. You will be doing a great service to some people in the near future
I'm stunned that there are places where the statute of limitations on *murder* is only *ten years.* Things that happened ten years ago don't feel "long ago" to me at all. If I had a family member who was murdered ten years ago, I can't imagine having the killer be able to walk up to me, say they did it, and then walk away without me having any legal recourse.
I also like that the first limitation law was literally: "Finders keepers. Losers weepers."
10 years is a long time for a body, a crime scene & witnesses though. very few people can accurately remember what happened 10 years ago, crime scenes change & may just not exist anymore & it's difficult to establish evidence from a body after it is a skeleton, especially evidence that would link someone to the crime. i think murder probably shouldn't have a statute, but it's more abt just that it's borderline impossible to get accurate evidence after a decade & less that murder obviously effects loved ones for life. statute should be longer if guilt can be definitively proved, but it's just hard to get evidence & convict someone after 10 years. memories get fuzzy & places change, so testimony that would be damning 10 years ago just can't be anymore. someone's recollection that places another at the scene is a lot more credible a week after than a decade after. 10 years is way too short in terms of other pros of statute (like being unlikely to commit the crime again, being likely to disclose important information, etc) but in terms of effective evidence it's just too long
"I always assumed that the law was more reactive to modern climates"
*laughs in homosexuality illegal in 40 of 53 commonwealth countries thanks to the one same penal code*
For reference:
"The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary association of 54 sovereign states. Nearly all of them are former British colonies or dependencies of those colonies.
No one government in the Commonwealth exercises power over the others, as is the case in a political union. Rather, the Commonwealth is an international organization in which countries with diverse social, political, and economic backgrounds are regarded as equal in status, and cooperate within a framework of common values and goals, as outlined in the Singapore Declaration issued in 1971.[1] Such common values and goals include the promotion of democracy, human rights, good governance, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality before the law, free trade, multilateralism, and world peace, which are promoted through multilateral projects and meetings, such as the Commonwealth Games, held once every four years."
Turns out, modern climates don't apply as long the people in power don't care.
@@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721 It is called corruption.. and a dysfunctional democracy.
Perhaps the climates of said countries aren't very modern? Unfortunately, over the past decade or so, we've seen many countries across the world move towards a much more dated political climate.
The good days
I don't think you represented the meaning of derek parfit's statement very well. At least to my understanding, he's saying that after a long time has passed, it is actually immorral to punish the person.
Even if you could prove exactly with a fair trial that they did commit the crime.
And that is because that person has changed so much that they aren't the same person that committed the crime anymore.
Yeah, that's how I took that quote. I'm not sure I fully agree with it, but I think it makes a lot of sense for minor crimes. For someone who stole a candy bar as a kid, they're obviously a different person now.
which is a hilariously stupid idea. A person who got away with a crime does not develop into a better person. There are no exceptions to this rule. And the victim is not healed in any way just because the perpetrator has changed. It is immoral to let a murder live. There are no exceptions. Their victim did not have the opportunity to grow and change, the murderer must die, and any who would allow that monster to live will burn for all eternity in hell for sheer moral corruption.
@@zilvoxidgod Remember, the point of a sentence is to rehabilitate, not for avenging the victim. If the murderer is now a productive and sensible member of society, then there is nothing left to rehabilitate.
@@zilvoxidgod Further adding onto everything else said above me, why is more murder the response to murder? Murdering the murderer removes any chances at rehabilitation or otherwise punishment because the only punishment is... Death? If you murder someone, you're likely not going to care about being killed beyond the base human instinct of not wanting to die. A better punishment is to ensure they never do it again while also trying to ensure the person actually faced punishment for what they've done, but as we've already established, murderers who receive the death sentence often do not care if they die. A better punishment is long and enduring, trying to rehabilitate them so the murdered's death means something.
@@almerakbar Fines are punishments not rehabilitation.
Prisons however are for many things... Punishments, rehabilitation or keeping harmful people away from others. Many don't agree on which we should prioritise or even which are legitimate reasons.
It’s all legal ‘til you’re caught
Such fun to watch, Subbed!
Seriously it looks like it took ages to make
that reminds me i should start watching you again
One this only has 3 comments and Two All of the comments came in 3 months
Damn. I would be pretty happy to have Cody subbed to me lol. Good job!
Same
esromeR
But the birds can’t get get convicted of crimes, much less a fowliny, because they work for the bourgeoisie 😔
Birdgeoisie?
We need a revolution of the crowletariat.
Love the dedication, I don’t think most people could do that project about statute of limitations.
your channel is incredibly underrated!
It's the time between videos that keeps it as such. Unfortunately.
Thank you, Brian David Gilbert of Crime, for this fascinating explanation of how to maximise my chances of getting away with murder so long as I have the money to travel to somewhere not colonised by the British
better keep extradition laws in mind, that would be a big oopsie
Oh mahgawd this country's colonized by britain...
Thank you so much for this Video!
I discovered the statute of limitations watching Itaewon class, episode 3. I am always after the "why"s and could not resist finding out what this meant. I am deeply Grateful for the amount of knowledge people like you collect, summarize and make it fun to read. People call you nerds but I call you a hero.
Thank you so much Ms
“I forgot about Greenland”
Denmark literally shows up behind her 2 seconds later
Denmark isn't greenland?
@@olliepope5775 denmark isnt greenland, but greenland is denmark
@@rallis3937 what does this meannnnnnn
@@olliepope5775 greenland isnt an independant country but under danish rule, though it has a lot of autonomy
@@rallis3937 understood, cheers bro 👌
Yes a new video!!!
See y'all in 6 months take care.
The call out I deserve.
I was really going to write this
As much as I appreciate the philosophy and do apply it as a truth pertaining to attempting to hold someone accountable for a crime they've long since moved past, the existence of statutes of limitations are purely practical from a legal standpoint.
The concern you brought up is a valid one. No matter the crime, citizens are entitled in most cases to due process, and that gets muddier when dealing with certain felony lengths such as 6 years. Evidence is still needed, and in lack of physical proof, that relies on witness testimony, which can deteriorate more and more as the length from the crime passes on, people move, people die, etc. At that point, prosecuting the crime becomes nearly impossible in some cases. The statute is far longer than it needs to be, but that's only a buffer for when new evidence in a case DOES appear.
But the overall end result is less glamorous than even that. Court systems around the world have varying degrees of success managing the crimes that are committed in today's world, whether it be the odd Karen assault or criminal act irresponsibly posted to social media, Often, there can be months of court and legal man hours sunk into charges that may not even go anywhere by the end of it. The last thing any court system under that pressure wants, is to have to try a 2-3 year old case with details puzzle pieced together from spotty witness accounts and deteriorating evidence. A case like that would probably take twice as long to prosecute if there's even a halfway decent enough legal defense to provide enough reasonable doubt assertions to land an acquittal, then good old double jeopardy sinks in and the entire prosecution effort was all but wasted, even if the accused was proven to be guilty later on. The written statute of limitation is just the final cutoff for the courts to say "This is out of our hands now". They don't want to waste court time figuring out progressively blurrier cases when they still have their hands full with the cut and dry cases with full camera footage proof that the Karen defendant INSISTS on pleading Not Guilty to.
Tenets of this nature even exist in civil cases. For example, the Theodosius II declaration you made mention of is similar to the core of Adverse Possession. Despite how it gets commonly abused, the core of idea is that if someone lives in a home or has used a piece of land like their own for a significant period of time, it should be reasonably expected that everyone nearby believes that property is theirs, regardless of the misunderstandings that may have preceded it. It becomes chaotic when an entity suddenly comes out of nowhere and asserts that they own something when they haven't been responsible for maintaining it, improving it, or in extreme cases, not even paying property taxes.on what they claim is theirs. Courts and lawyers don't need to be rifling through worn out letters between Grandpappy and Old Lady Wilkins about some informal arrangement where Wilkins is allowed to live on the other side of 10 acres of land in exchange for feeding the hens and babysitting on Thursdays. So they put a cap to the time one has to raise a complaint about disputes of this nature, mostly because the truth can get buried once one generation passes on and leaves things to the next based on assumptions. Obviously, the next person to occupy the shack shouldn't be punished for their lack of knowledge and inactivity from the land owners, causing these things to apply under basis of common sense. I.e. if you own something, act like it.
The last reason is a rare one, but still applies as well, and that is that the law, both criminal and civil, can be constantly changing. Obviously if something is legal when it's committed and made illegal later, it's not reasonable to say you should be tried for it. Vice versa, if something is illegal, and later becomes legal, you also can't reasonably be expected to be tried for it now that it's no longer tried as a crime. But the thing is, the minutiae and finer procedures of dealing with criminal cases and civil procedures can have a lot happen to them with a couple of years time. Just think of all the mandates that went in effect during 2020 that had real enforceable consequences like fines and sentencing. Eventually, these kinds of mandates will be dissolved, and it's not going to be reasonable for someone to pull out some camera footage from the time showing someone violating one of these measures, even in as little as a few months from the time the measure was lifted. Smaller changes than that could be made to things as simple as "what is allowed as admissible evidence" that could radically change how these cases are handled, DNA being used as forensic evidence is as modern as the mid 1980s, but it'd be difficult to imagine trying to extract DNA evidence from cases where the crime scene has been cleared up and there were fewer concerns about proper forensic handling. That's no different to things happening now that we may discover solutions for a decade in the future. Procedures will have long since evolved to a point where the methods are no longer compatible, and there may be no more use trying to force it.
I did like the video and it does provide a lot of room for thought, but sometimes the WHY isn't just one big thing, but a lot of small things.
I couldn't sue my doctor for botching my surgery because the limitations came up, even though the symptoms didn't show until a few years after the surgery; the statute was 3 years post surgery. I'm stuck with those side effects forever and I have to pay to have the surgery done again 🙃
The limitation period generally begins when the plaintiff's cause of action accrues, meaning the date upon which the plaintiff is first able to maintain the cause of action in court, or when the plaintiff first becomes aware of a previous injury (for example, occupational lung diseases such as asbestosis).
look at the spreadsheet, sees Czechoslovakia cry in Slovak.
*cries in Czech dialect
IT DOESNT SHOW COUNTRY BUT WHAT STATE THE COUNTRY GOT INDEPENCE FROM brácho
aw yeah Czechoslovakia, the cooler named one. Czech Republic is still cool
To quote my schoolbook, "The law aids the vigilant, not those who slumber on their rights. Vigilantibus, sed non dormientibus jura subverniunt."
The dedication on this woman to do something like this god danm
Those animations were amaaaaziiiing! The video as a whole was great BUT THOSE ANIMATIONS!!!! 🔥🔥🔥
Remarkably, I got my tablet monitor because of one of your reviews. So that's cool!
I would like to see the spreadsheet! For nerdy curiousity.
3:40
Don't worry, there's never any data on Greenland.
Which means they won't have data on any crimes I commit!
Greenland is Denmark anyways
Worrying about what people “deserve” has always seemed problematic to me. Just worry about what will make the future better. Often those things that will make the future better align with what we think people deserve.
Revenge is basically how most people think.
Here's the problem with that idea. It gives the power to people who do bad things because as long as they do bad things in such a way that punishing them is not worth it they can keep doing bad things.
In the long run worrying about the future means worrying about what people deserve.
@@DIVAD291 The two have some overlap of course, but they aren't identical. Worrying about what's best for the future *must include* worrying about keeping people from doing bad things again and again. Since that's part of the future.
But this video revolves specifically around people who *didn't* abuse the fact they weren't punished to do more crimes. If they did, it would be irrelevant if their old crimes were ignored, as they'd have plenty of newer ones.
@@DIVAD291 If a person commits murder, it shows they are willing to commit murder, so there's a high risk they will perform another murder. This risk is bad for society, so we lock them up until we deem them low risk. I live in a country that has a focus on rehabilitation.
But if someone commits murder but has lived without doing another crime for 30 years, then they have demonstrated that they can get by legally and don't have any particular urge to commit crime, so it's assumed they have rehabilitated themselves, as they get along with society.
we deserve a better future
As an attorney… I appreciate that you had the question and then took the time to really, really figure it out. I mean, I know that’s kind of the point of this channel, but I still enjoyed the effort. (Also, the quote you used explaining statutes of limitations? I’ve literally used it in a brief before, though while arguing about laches rather than SOLs.)
Edit: also, I love that the first limitations law you found was a property law. Fucking property law. It’s a nightmare.
Normies: store passwords in 3rd party system.
Me, an intellectual: *forgot password? We’ll send you an email to reset it*
Live in Da Booty? Girl trust me, I've been trying.
It's also a special kind of principle witness regulation. When your crimes are forgiven, then maybe that will lead you to reveal some information which helps punish worse crimes, retrieve valuables or prevent further physical harm.
In Germany and Japan there's a saying "Mord verjährt nicht" which means that intentional homicide does never expire, but also implies, that pretty much every other crime does expire. The above reason and the fact that our principle witness regulations are pretty weak explain part of why we should let all other crimes expire.
I have no idea how/why RUclips algorithm decided to put this channel on my suggestions. But I'm soooooo thankful for it !! You spend some serious efforts in your videos, while making research feel as cool as it should :)
Also given the very wide variety of topics you cover in your videos, gives one confidence that they can look up things that they previously didn't have much knowledge about and actually come out with usable information/tools.
Thanks so much for this content :)
It's because in 20 years you're probably literally an entirely different person
Exactly. I recommend you to watch Vsauce video on Misnomers
100% agree. Now murder should never expire, but yes you’re absolutely a different, person. If you have a soul, you have to live with that crime in your head everyday, sometimes your mind can be much worse then any prison.
@@xphonegaminginc.6310 "If you have a soul, you have to live with that crime in your head everyday, sometimes your mind can be much worse then any prison." That assumes you are an empathetic person. There are people out there who can kill another person and not feel any bad about it.
Literally an entirely different person? Identity theft is not a joke Jim 😛
@@mujiescomedy279 lmao
Love that the netherlands has the rule that if you do something and it becomes illegal after you wont be charged. As well as that if you were ruled innocent by the highest court that they cannot bother you about it anymore (exept they added something about being able to go back to heavy crimes like murder)
OMG where was your channel this whole time?? The VOX we all needed
Omg you're amazing for compiling all of this!
I've recently started watching stuff from this channel. The way its done makes me.feel nostalgic for some old kids shows I used to watch. Not sure why.
Wow, this video was just really impressive. I've gotten so used to having youtube videos only vaguely sort of touch the subject that is the premise for the video. This, this was not that.
I loved this, it was super cool and interesting! This made me excited about going back to start my next semester at university
If I kill someone and the statute of limitations expires, do I still feel any remorse??
Did you ever feel any? Ha! n00b get gud or GTFO
It says in the description to comment remorse after reading it
I dont know how you did it, but the way you said that last sentence, it f*cked with my soul... 10:01
the amount of dedication and time she spent on this video seriously amazes me, congratulations it paid off!
Simone: *spends 3 days reading penal codes*
Also Simone: “And I’m not doing that because I’m lazy!”
She stopped at 3 days, just reading my hometowns ordinances to see if I can keep bees took me several hours.
Hearing that the person call themselves lazy although they spend three days searching information to show something to people... it's pain, you are cool, i love you
4:30 “I’m lazy”
Also Sabrina: time to find EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY’s expiration date for murder!!
I was literally trying to find statutes of limitation for different crimes a few months ago for a story I was writing you are a god
It makes sense to me - if someone commits a crime and the statute of limitations runs out, that often means they weren't out committing worse/repeat offenses, or they didn't cause enough of a problem for law enforcement to get involved. At worst, they're constantly on the run from law enforcement, but at least that life is kind of a punishment in and of itself.
Turns out someone's new year's resolution was to upload some videos.
I’ve watched this video like 3 times now, and I can’t stop myself from periodically coming back. It makes me feel happy and hopeful.
Me too :)
I just realized that your voice is so clear that I don’t need captions. I dunno why that makes me giddy, but it does. (Ps: your voice is also super calming.)
Cold Case Files: You're going down Granny!
The REMORSE I feel for not knowing this before. I love your channel.
Oh I've learned about this once. The study I read talked about how if you punish someone too late the effect wont work and the only reason to do it is moral rage.
Pretty sure the limitation period in Greenland is the same as Denmark, so you're good.
Great video btw!
"...but then I just stopped going because... School crushed my spirit." I don't think I've ever related to anything so hard 🥲
“Ate like a raccoon in a garbage dump?” Has got to be my new favourite saying. Your talent for communication is superb.
Is it bad that I said out loud "that is a BEAUTIFULLY organised spreadsheet!"