Why Do Crimes Expire?

[@shutupsavannah2195]

This video has big BDG unraveled energy tbh

[@Camdavideogameaddict]

god bless the man who saved Polygon.. well. monster factory too

[@answerinprogress]

Could not ask for a better energy.

[@littlet551]

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

[@TheoStimac]

Didn't waste/use enough paper.

[@rarae_paradox]

Hey you should try to get hired by VOX News😃

[@Pembroke898]

"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

[@Elena-tz9ev]

I am pretty sure it was google sheets but... IDK why i brothered to correct you

[@Elena-tz9ev]

Also at that time I was attending an online course about excel so maybe that's why, lol

[@Mrsquiggley]

This is the kind of laziness i strive for

[@capperbuns]

Doing sheets is fun.

[@BulgrozTseNob]

typical INTP behaviour while hyperfocusing ^^'

[@IngeborgEngh]

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).

[@23malachite]

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.

[@mlem1042]

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.

[@jakubrogacz6829]

@@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.

[@mlem1042]

@@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.

[@mlem1042]

@@jakubrogacz6829 I am sorry that the comment is so long, I am drunk right now and didn't know how to shorten it.

[@shirosejiokami4168]

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

[@greenkerbal632]

Same

[@francescoragnoni8042]

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.

[@Zytron]

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.

[@benphilpott710]

"intentional homicide means you intended to homicide" good that's cleared up now

[@thomasknight604]

Not really because intending to homicide does not meet the requirements of intentional homicide.

[@humanbean6672]

@@thomasknight604 wat

[@zachbrannigan3184]

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".

[@themadlad_]

I still don't understand, more explanation needed

[@thomasknight604]

@@themadlad_ intentional homicide is first or second degree murder. Intending to homicide is attempted murder. Different charges.

[@dbergerac9632]

Jan 1 2020, anything is possible. 2020: everything happened.

[@MollyAhern]

dbergerac "never went to the gym? now you can!" was a little too funny

[@ezraoberheim1081]

2020: "HOLD MY BEER"

[@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721]

WAIT NO WE DIDN'T MEAN IT LIKE THAT!

[@uxleumas]

@@MollyAhern "now you can't"

[@hiteshh.6274]

2021 : well yes, but no...

[@MegaKoutsou]

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

[@cadekachelmeier7251]

3 is basically why I think almost all prison sentences should be under 10-15 years. Including violent crimes.

[@banana-uo3be]

@@cadekachelmeier7251 idk man, some crimes are too cruel to be forgiven in such a short period of time.

[@jakubrogacz6829]

@@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?

[@kakussubrado8966]

@@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?

[@tayntedmemories]

@@cadekachelmeier7251 All rape, murder, or anything like that should be immediate death penalty, no exceptions.

[@princesstarah2]

That database is?? So pretty??? We love a good color-coded chart. You're a saint for putting this together omg

[@lakkakka]

we? How many of you are between your ears?

[@Twebs12]

SarahAnnRose23 kzbin.info/www/bejne/gKSQpKKNgtOHjMU

[@Rabbit-the-One]

Same question. We?

[@ryanestes7331]

I hereby accept your we. I love stats and charts, there are now atleast two of us

[@oliverwalters9533]

A good coloured chart makes it so much easier to read

[@Alex_Off-Beat]

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?

[@Rabbit-the-One]

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.

[@Alex_Off-Beat]

@@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

[@jessegro4]

ickibot geez what god forsaken country do you live in?

[@kathrinlindern2697]

​@@EGlVM OP specifically said for selling drugs 50+ years ago... Not murder!

[@vulbvibe]

Plus old people are expensive to house in prison. That’s why they get early releases.

[@acushla_music]

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.

[@acushla_music]

Can you make that sped sheet availabe? It's so good lol

[@rum-ham]

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.

[@anthonyhadsell2673]

So the phrase "its not illegal if you don't get caught" Is legally speaking accurate.

[@lucaslucas191202]

Only after a couple of years though

[@tomsoki5738]

Not if your in the UK or any of the ex British colonies haha

[@theapexsurvivor9538]

@@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).

[@---cr8nw]

Wrong. It's still illegal. It's just un-punishable after a certain period of time.

[@crystalwolcott4744]

@@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.

[@jerrychua9364]

"I forgot about Greenland" sounds like every virus in plague INC

[@Freekymoho]

@ 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

[@Miilu572]

freakymoejoe2 i’m from greenland and it’s the same laws as in denmark

[@thesplittzcreengamer2299]

Sabrina is a virus confirmed

[@oofs6037]

@M Y N W O R D lmao

[@cifge_404]

Lol I actually figured out a strategy to basically always win Plague INC so I eventually got bored and deleted it XD

[@The_Foreman]

"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.

[@muyou6589]

3:02 I'm sorry, but I keep mishearing "you should live in the booty"

[@Nigarj]

What did she actually say? Dubai?

[@muyou6589]

@@Nigarj Djibouti, a country in East Africa

[@eliza8514]

@@muyou6589 Isn't it pronounced like "ji-boot-ee", not "di-boot-ee"? I think that's part of the confusion

[@oliviahughes3883]

UNDERATED!!

[@j.r.765]

@@eliza8514 Yes, it is pronounced "ji-boo-tee"

[@femalewoman7441]

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

[@LM-he7eb]

Yep. You're very strong & you did very well by reporting. 17years on & I'm still not ready

[@yondie491]

There are indeed some crimes that either definitely shouldn't, or probably shouldn't, have SoL's. Sexual crimes are on that list.

[@mustangnawt1]

“In Dabooty” sounds like a whole other crime

[@josiahm.8711]

Intrigue

[@Cosmiccoffeecup]

Penal codes in "Dabooty"

[@michaelotis223]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 well played

[@tomsoki5738]

Degdeg so it’s a medieval society?

[@FriedrichTheGreatest]

@Degdeg """justice"""

[@Rathdrgnknight]

"...and then i stopped reading because school crushed my spirit" Oof that hurts because it's so relatable...

[@MedlifeCrisis]

Amazing piece of work.

[@tago3860]

Heyyyy I am your fan

[@evannibbe9375]

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

[@tiomela]

Found Medlife Crisis in the wild!

[@calamitywindpetal]

"I'm lazy" she says, having done hours upon hours of research for an 11 minute video

[@tekanatoken]

She said she spent 3 days reading up on penal codes..

[@exy8423]

and that’s not counting the time spent filming, editing, rendering...

[@jacobjones5404]

procrastination does wonders

[@lilpwnige]

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.

[@timenovelist1]

Can't believe it took me this long to realize you remind of Chidi from the Good Place

[@icymoons]

this was because of the library segment, wasn't it?

[@timenovelist1]

@@icymoons Just how she speaks and acts in general

[@CricketKaya]

Deon Pyle-Williams UR RIGHT

[@analisapena3086]

“Put the peeps in the chili pot and add the m&m’s.”

[@Itsgiraffeagain]

Omg yes

[@NoName-ik2du]

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."

[@meowmeowmeow300]

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

[@brook.53]

It’s all legal ‘til you’re caught

[@AliLightfoot]

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 KZbin?"

[@AliLightfoot]

oh, yeah REMORSE

[@josieschoenberg6322]

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)

[@rokukou]

Stellvia Hoenheim calm down, incel

[@ExcludedShadow]

Stellvia Hoenheim yikes did the girl in your chess club reject you again? It’s alright buddy, your right hand will never wrong you

[@amur5048]

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

[@noamtashma2859]

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.

[@fergochan]

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.

[@zilvoxidgod]

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.

[@almerakbar]

@@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.

[@cookiemonster59263]

@@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.

[@danielhawkins3392]

@@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.

[@Meownicornimitri]

The amount of research she has done for a 12 minutes is mind-blowing

[@zhyakoxalid6892]

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

[@NLvideomaster]

The lawyer in me had a FIELD DAY with you say... @ around the 2:25 minute mark, only got better from there 🤣

[@Camdavideogameaddict]

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?!"

[@switchplayer1016]

The letter above A would be S rank.

[@junedanieltamor9071]

omgggg imagine in the future you get an SS instead of an A+

[@thatoneguy9582]

the jdlt SS 800pp

[@kafir1337]

@@thatoneguy9582 nice

[@alejandroreyes9975]

@@junedanieltamor9071 The jews really feel that

[@andy02q]

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.

[@sophiawelsh1517]

esromeR But the birds can’t get get convicted of crimes, much less a fowliny, because they work for the bourgeoisie 😔

[@higamaynard]

Birdgeoisie?

[@ironicdivinemandatestan4262]

We need a revolution of the crowletariat.

[@AlterationA]

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.

[@theCodyReeder]

Such fun to watch, Subbed!

[@erazn9077]

Seriously it looks like it took ages to make

[@lukesmith8896]

that reminds me i should start watching you again

[@MarcTelang]

One this only has 3 comments and Two All of the comments came in 3 months

[@NeocryptMyth]

Damn. I would be pretty happy to have Cody subbed to me lol. Good job!

[@crocomire936]

Same

[@grey3247]

One thing I always assumed is that, well, if you committed a crime a long time ago, but then reformed and didn't commit a crime again, after a certain amount of years, it becomes kinda pointless to punish someone that may have already reformed by themselves or just, haven't committed a crime again. Mostly because jail tends to make non criminals into criminal-criminals

[@ulterno1665]

2:49 Thank you for being that nerd. You will be doing a great service to some people in the near future

[@OneUpdateataTime]

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

[@mac8697]

better keep extradition laws in mind, that would be a big oopsie

[@Orchidlettux]

Oh mahgawd this country's colonized by britain...

[@malvingin7187]

dude this channel is criminally underrated

[@Naotahaley]

*OMG IT'S TIME. WE'VE BEEN WAITING FOR YOU TO COME BACK ILYSM*

[@butsoftwhatblight]

"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*

[@IamBHM]

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."

[@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721]

Turns out, modern climates don't apply as long the people in power don't care.

[@jjo-mg8xo]

@@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721 It is called corruption.. and a dysfunctional democracy.

[@jakobholgersson4400]

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.

[@syrup7894]

The good days

[@GimmickBox39]

It's weird how we can forget about a murder charge in about 10 years because they are a new person, but people can serve way more than 10 if charged. In some areas, murder is the death penalty. And for the vast majority of people, 10 years still has plenty of life to be lived after.

[@storminmormin14]

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.

[@cortster12]

Revenge is basically how most people think.

[@DIVAD291]

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.

[@iaknihs]

@@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.

[@happydemon3038]

@@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.

[@Dumpknoedel]

we deserve a better future

[@mlem1042]

I cannot with how silly the ending was? Like what kind of responsibility does the person who committed the crime have? That they have a clean slate and can’t dirty it? Neither can I and I’ve never done anything illegal

[@combustbanx]

If I kill someone and the statute of limitations expires, do I still feel any remorse??

[@Rabbit-the-One]

Did you ever feel any? Ha! n00b get gud or GTFO

[@easiestpeasiet]

It says in the description to comment remorse after reading it

[@calebcain4729]

I think there are two reasons for crime expiration that you're not fully considering. (Although you alluded to the 2nd.) 1. Prosecution of crime IS NOT meant to be retribution. (Unless you're sadistic.) If it is retributive (I had to check if that was actually a word) then after you prosecute the original criminal you should also prosecute those who punish them, because they have also caused harm. We should never turn into bad people in response to bad people. Criminal justice SHOULD ALWAYS be meant to prevent harm. If the punishment for a crime causes harm to the criminal but prevents no harm to anybody else then it is merely an excuse for somebody else to do harm. 2. Prosecution of crimes should be against the person who committed the crime, not merely somebody with their same genetic code. It would not be fair to prosecute an identical twin for a crime committed by their identical sibling for example. That said, we are not the same person we used to be, regardless of what our fingerprints or DNA tell us. From my personal life, when I was half my current age I was a conservative, anti-LGBTQIA+, Christian missionary. I am now a highly liberal gender-queer pansexual pro-LGBTQIA+ atheist. If I were charged with a (hypothetical) crime that I committed back then, and convicted, then I essentially would be punished for a crime committed by a person that is nothing like me, despite the fact that I have all of their memories, fingerprints, and DNA. Would you really feel justified (NON-SADISTICALLY) doing that to somebody?

[@StaleBaguette]

The dedication on this woman to do something like this god danm

[@jey.1024]

this was such an amazing video and I learned a bunch, but the one thing that really surprised me the most about MYSELF was the realization that if I was tasked with finding information about something and only had the library as my resource, I wouldn't know where to start or how to do it

[@pabloemiliorui2281]

"and i'm lazy" *works nonstop for three days compiling law stats*

[@isnakolah]

Turns out someone's new year's resolution was to upload some videos.

[@iken1308]

I actually needed the tips for the "procrastinated your days away" part.

[@IQzminus2]

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

[@leonardomennitti8662]

Teh quality of this video is simply insane, how on earth did you create those animations??

[@tempest_dawn]

I almost feel like statute of limitations is also to do with the idea that if the person in question hasn't continued to commit crimes then they must have changed. If they haven't changed, and have continued committing crimes, then there will be more recent evidence.

[@waltergc5443]

In some parts of Latin America that's called prescription and is usually the same time the conviction time that the crime one is accused of lasts.

[@kathlynarchibald-drew4395]

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.

[@23malachite]

Me too :)

[@Neerobulli]

Pretty sure the limitation period in Greenland is the same as Denmark, so you're good. Great video btw!

[@aeshnasalwan8768]

Hey I'm a law student from India and lemme just tell you what a FREAKING awesome job you did!! To compile a database for THAT many penal provisions from around the world in 3 days.... Wow!! You're a real trooper dude! Respect +1000 🔥🔥🔥

[@hannahkessler9423]

You deserve to give a ted talk

[@icymoons]

she has before!!

[@mycharliequinn]

I kinda wish this had been framed more to point out that the role of the penal code isn't to punish people for doing bad things, it's to protect society. so it becomes more clear that if someone does one theft and then zero thefts for twenty years then nobody is protecting anybody by incarcerating them. however thinking of the penal system like this might make it clear that the incarceration of people like dealer addicts makes zero sense and actively makes society worse and people don't like when you say stuff like that.

[@kaemonbonet4931]

Sabrina: lol I'm so lazy Also Sabrina: I'ma do 3 days of International legal research and create graphics and programs to organize my data for fun.

[@julians.2597]

my take is that law enforcement has the luxury of preserving evidence indefinitely, including witness report taken on the day of the crime, footprints, etc., whereas the defendant has no way of doing so and thus even if evidence of a persons crime seems to have been perfectly preserved, the potentially missing receipt for a restaurant 2000km away from the crime at the time of the crime will never be seen. The defendant may not even have known that he was being investigated in a criminal case, giving them no chance at all to build a defence from such forms of evidence which cannot be indefinitely preserved by a layperson and/or without knowledge of their importance.

[@samuhikabuddhi.761]

Crime is something that exists only in relation to two or more individuals. Crime in practical terms arises,when between... lets take two individuals, one individual for some reason is extremely offended or hurt by an action of the other individual . Now the person feeling offended or hurt wants a compensation from other person. As soon as the offended or hurt person asks for a punishment for the person who offended or hurt him/ her , the activity of the offender becomes a crime, especially if many other members also consider the activity as punishment worthy, offensive or hurtful enough. One cannot ask for a punishment much later than the actual timepoint of the crime because whether someone feels hurt or offended is subjective,a different person might not feel hurt or offended from the same activity. So those who feel hurt are most likely to file a complaint instantly and demand punishment instantly , and very unlikely to be complaining suddenly after many years . Those who are going to demand punishment for something in the distant past are most probably doing it to hurt the peaceful present state of the accused,may be out of hate. Thus putting a limit on how much late you are allowed to be before you finally accuse, helps protect the accused after the deadline from unfair hateful accusations unnecessarily disrupting his/her's life.

[@eklhaft4531]

Honestly I had no idea that my country (Czech Republic) had a limitation for homicides. I always thought an offense was like 2 years or whatever and any felony was forever. Thanks.

[@AdityaPrasad007]

I'm always happy to find a female content creator I love. It reassures me that I'm not really sexist. I just happen to sub to so many guys...

[@butterdog9483]

What

[@AdityaPrasad007]

@@butterdog9483 imagine you only crush on white girls, won't you worry if you are racist? Then if you crush on a African girl won't you feel relieved that you aren't? I usually watch male creators and I sometimes wonder if that's because I have some bias. But since I'm able to appreciate content by her, I think I've convinced myself that I'm not a sexist.

[@nerdacademy3231]

Yeah people change. I know I’m not even remotely the same person that I was10 years ago. Almost everything about me has changed. Granted I was 20 ten years ago and I know 20 to 30 is a big change, but still. I did and said some things when I was 18-20 that I totally cringe at now. Nothing against the law or anything, but just things that the current version of myself would never do. Things like sleeping on the job, lying for no good reason, etc.. I’m all for justice, but if you punish someone for a crime that they committed 10 or more years ago are you really punishing the same person that committed the crime? “ No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man.” - Heraclitus

[@legacy-oo1zq]

For those who enjoy the concept of brevity and are too lazy too look it up: "The main purpose of these laws is to ensure that convictions are based upon evidence (physical or eyewitness) that has not deteriorated with time. After the time period has run, the crime can no longer be prosecuted, meaning that the accused person is essentially free." - googles third stepson

[@wrmoose6542]

"I watch a lot of cops tv shows today" well, about that.

[@rubenlarochelle1881]

9:17 There was 20-ish years old Italian movie I can't find now where, in the courtyard of a prison, a dialogue happens between two high officials (like the Director or something): - Hey, did you know that the cells of the human body constantly die and regenerate all the time? - You mean, like hair? - No, not only hair, _every_ cell. Eyes, skin, muscles, bones... heck, even the brain. - They all regenerate? - Yes, exactly. Each type of cell has its duration, like for example, I don't know, a skin cell lasts one year and a brain cell lasts five years. - So they're not the same cells I once used to have? - Exactly. Turns out that, in any given period of ten years, what you are now and what you were ten years ago have absolutely not a single cell in common. - And what does it mean? - It means that, whatever your imperfectly-transcribed memories tell you about what "you" did ten years ago, in reality not a single cell of what "you" are was actually there. You were not even present. Someone else did it, someone else who just resembles you and from whom you inherit some memories, that's all. - Wow, are you serioous? - Yes, it's crazy if you think about it... Look, look at them [the inmates hanging in the courtyard] That guy got 30 years [maximum sentence you can receive in Italy except life], it's been 4 years now, 26 remaining. And that other guy? He got life in prison at 20, now he's 45, nice guy, totally a different person, wouldn't hurt a fly, and yet he has to stay for the next, I don't know, 30, maybe 50 years, until he dies, long after we retire, in this very place almost all the persons he has been will have spent their entire existences. - What do you want to tell me? - I was thinking... People can be in jail for 30 years, or even for life. Outside of prison, people commonly say "It's been 20 years" to indicate something that isn't important anymore, and yet what turns out to be the actual time period a person changes completely is much shorter than than 30-40 years, it's ten. Tell me, do you honest-heartedly believe that it's actually fair to keep someone behind bars more than 10 years after the event? That it's correct to punish someone for something that was done when not a single cell of his body was even there? That person as we know them today didn't even exist at the time of the event, so they couldn't possibly have committed the crime, right? - (pause) What are you telling me, Pal! Have you gone mad now? Listen, I now it can be frustrating to work here, but it's not that complex: criminals stay in jail and our job is to keep them inside, plain and simple. Are you maybe having doubts about your job? Listen bud, relax. I don't know, take some days off maybe. When the stress is gone, just come back here and don't think about that. - (faking agreement) Alright, alright, nevermind...

[@milantiquestudios7460]

Why do crimes expire? So I can tell my weed and drunk stories as an old man without worry of being arrested. Duh. lol

[@BigBBigTrees]

Your questioning is hurting my head. Are you telling me you’re confused as to why I shouldn’t be charged when I drove drunk at 18, now that I’m 30 and refuse to do something like that?

[@Cacowninja]

Classic Law Phrase: You do the crime, you do the time! Statue of Limitations: Ahem! Classic Law Phrase: Ugh! Fine! You do the crime, law low enough for long enough, you don't do the time! Ugh! Lack of accountability! Statue of Limitations: Teehee!

[@flute1234555]

“They can never dirty it again”, but are there any cases of people committing a major crime (like murder), statute of limitation passed, and then committed the same crime again?

[@limerence8365]

Imagine having a statute of limitations for pedophilia but by the time you grow up and the government allows you to make your own dicisions, the statute has ran out. Or you were of age at the time of the assault but were shamed into remaining silent until some other survivors speak up. Certain terrible crimes should have no statute of limitations.

[@da1g]

Excellent video. You should have way more subs/views. Excellent quality, editing, and layout of information. Keep up the great work. Thanks for putting the ad at the end. I'm YT premium, and usually click off at this point. So thanks for that.

[@quirkykidsph]

A side note as to the reason why a country's statute of limitations is influenced by its colonizer is because most if not all of their penal laws were adapted from their colonizer's laws. For example, our country's current penal laws still follow the colonizer's nomenclature for the penalties and some of the crimes. Our legislative body sees no reason to change them because for the most part, they are still relevant today and a complete overhaul is frankly a waste of resource. Basically, don't fix it if it ain't broke.

[@-beee-]

It seems like we also want to recognize that people can change, so if they did something awful a long time ago, but haven't since... we don't necessarily make society better by punishing/restraining that person.

[@drizzify7850]

I'd like to note that the chances one gets away because of the limitations that's only going to boost the confidence in doing it again very few will actually live a clean life after that anyway.

[@2ndsnake899]

*_"I figure with the statue of limitations it really should be close to two fifty."_* -Johnny Gat, *_Saints Row 2_*

[@bubby632]

Picture this: It's the year 3050 and you kill someone you throw up from the adrenaline, then you go to your time machine, the rusted glory herself that was once your great grandfather's before in the old times when could just buy one. You travel 50 years in the future, you now know you're now safe

[@wassap124]

in Israel we have this weird concept called "public disinterest", which means I can call the police and file a complaint, and they can just legally decide not to do anything about it

[@pavelmedbery3055]

It's been a while since youtube recommendations has produced something of this caliber.

[@rooneye]

0:05 you should live in "Da booty"! lol seriously though there is a j in the name for a reason...because you're meant to pronounce it...

[@andrelima4125]

What if the judicial system becomes corrupt by making huge processes with hundreds of defendants and hundreds of pages and little stuff to be figured out ( + discovery and evidences to catalogue and discuss) and by the time it reaches court it's useless cuz most of the crimes compiled had expired? Happening in Portugal right now

[@hunter1586]

“Because Canada used to be a British colony” *me an american*” but you guys speak French!!!?!!?!!!!”

[@marinaschulz3183]

It used to be French too...

[@thefrenchselkie1401]

debile....

[@Michelle-iq2yp]

One minute in, I think it’s because if they couldn’t be caught in whatever the limited time is, then when the time runs out it will give them the opportunity to give the families closure without any repercussions

[@franticframes]

Your production quality is incredible!

[@boop7441]

imagine that you, lets say, robbed a shop unarmed. You were really desperate, and you needed the money for food. You get the money, you get out. The perfect crime, you are never caught. Of course, even if you were caught, the sentence would be 2 years in prison. You continue living your life, with this gnawing feeling of dread at the back of your mind, "what if they managed to find you." as the years go by it seems less likely for them to find you, but every time, just as it seems that you are safe, you hear about new forensic techniques, state of the art technology that helps people to catch criminals, keeping you on edge. And the guilt too, what happened to the person you robbed, the owner of that store? What if you saw the person that you robbed again? But it never happens. You spend 5, years, then 10, then 15, scared, worried, guilty. 20 years pass, and the worst happens. You see the person again. But you have a family now, a loving family and children to take care of. He brings you to the police station, he tries to charge you for the crime. "That's impossible, I'm afraid, even if it did happen, we can't possibly find any evidence, besides, the statue of limitation is 15 years, even if it did happen and we could prove it, his crime has expired." A wave of emotions flood you, relief? happiness? Yes, but also, guilt. You feel guilty for the harm you caused. The shop you robbed had to close down, the owner? A 60 year old man who had to toll his life away to get a stable business. And all those years leading to this moment, wretched with anxiety, when you are already a free man? The crime was committed, and it may look like the price was never paid, but maybe having to live a life of guilt and anxiety was the price all along, and you will have to bear this guilt for the rest of your life.

[@milktea2422]

I wonder when most of these statue of limitations were put in place for most of these countries, considering most countries’ kinda finalized their place in the world around 1900, then I kinda guess that the limitations are in some cases only 25 years for murder. Since the average life expectancy has gone up a lot in the last 100 years. But if it was very recently made and I’m like tf? What if you get away with murder at 15-17 and now your like 40. Like you literally murdered someone, were smart enough to get away with it and now get to live your life while those around them never got closure and you can now go around admitting to everyone you killed em. Like I’m hoping the only reason why serious crimes are only 25-30 years was because most people who committed crimes in 1840 would only live about 50 years at most so when their like 45 they don’t have to worry about being caught. But like being able to commit murder and then living like 35 years without ever facing consequences is while considering how many murders are actually unsolved in the US, it’s close to 50% of all murder are never solved, like wtf

[@rhueoflandorin]

I thought it was basic law/common sense---the reason why statute of limitation exists... The main purpose of the statute of limitations is to keep defendants from having to defend themselves from charges that occurred so far into the past that it makes it impossible to properly defend oneself. In many of these cases, evidence may no longer be available, making it harder to defend oneself and prove one's innocence. It would violate the defendant's right to receive due process under the law and the right to receive a fair trial if a prosecution was to take place under those conditions

[@fourleafcloveer5011]

I've never been so impressed with how a video was made. The editing and angles are great. You know how to get the most out of filming plus the delivery of information is in a way that is easily understood. Great content! I'm learning. lol

[@namelesschannel4193]

your dedication is incredible

[@NeilMalthus]

"They've been granted a clean slate but ... they can never dirty it again [???]" WTF can't they dirty it again???

[@Olav_Hansen]

So many people seem to have the wrong idea about how prisons originally were designed for. Everyone is talking about punishment, but then whipping the guilty party would have been sufficient. The reason prison sentences were originally created is to take the people away from whatever made them come to commit crime, and then reeducate them so they won't do it again. Ironically, many sentences are longer then would be effective, and prison is what's getting small offenders mixed up with gangs. And many countries with lesser sentences actually have less crime in general. In the Netherlands the worst situation you can find yourself in is basically being put in a mental warden, with a minimum prison sentence but no release until you aren't a risk for society. Besides that the worst criminals that make the national news typically get 8-15 years, which isn't that much compared to american standards.

[@redhawkneofeatherman261]

So by this logic The logic that, after so many years you are no longer guilty for your crime Doesn't it also imply that this 'expiry' time should be as long as the designated sentence? For example, you may be caught committing a crime and sentenced to 30 years. However, if you don't get noticed for 10 years, then you're off free. Surely instead however it should be If you don't get caught for _30_ years, you're off free? And if you're caught after 3 years, you only serve 27, and so on. Saying this from a logical viewpoint as opposed to a political one.

[@shanemadejthedemon8951]

2000: **kills officers friend** 2021: "hey remember me i killed your friend 21 years ago. Now you cant Arrest me"

[@Astarothlover436]

I'm sure you've heard it before, but your voice is absolutely amazing. Very soothing and expressive.

[@ETEcco]

Greenland isn't its own country so... it's subject to federal danish law I BELIEVE. They are soverign on most things and have been offered independence, but remained a part of Denmark so they are still subject to laws made for them and in a broader sense some federal laws (and rights).

[@l.wilson6492]

The first thing that came to mind for me was cold cases. Does this mean that cases such as Jamie Fraley (missing for nearly 15 years), Joseph Kinville (murdered 24 years ago), and Jenny Lin (murdered nearly 30 years ago) would forever go unsolved and no one would ever be convicted for such awful crimes? Well I did the research and answered that question. All the above mentioned crimes were committed in the USA, and after some research I found that the USA has no statute of limitations for murder (intentional homicide). Which is a really good thing otherwise criminals such as those who committed these murders that have gone unsolved for 20+ years would pretty much be rewarded for being smart.

[@florinivan6907]

A 65 year statute of limitations for murder could work. If you were 20 when you commited the crime laying low until 85. At that point you would actually be a bigger burden in prison. They'd spend too much. Its basically moving from one retirement home to another. Especially since a reform movement to separate elderly ie 55 and up convicts from general population has formed.

[@crasyperson123]

So I watched this video and heard you say that the oldest limitation was in rome, however I recently discovered that during the creation of Israel's old teatament law, there's a section in the book of numbers that goes over people who killed someone innocent unintentionally or accidentally. They actuallly had sanctuary cities designated for them to live in and they had to live there until the year of jubilee, which happened every fifty years. If, however, they were caught outside of said sanctuaries by relatives of the deceased, the relatives had the right to stone them. Again though, only before the year of jubilee. Fun fact, just thought I'd share.