Jucidial question

[Liar]

Trying to work out a plot twist in a play thingumie I'm working on, and I could use some help.

here's a scenario:
If I commit a crime, (for instance euthanasia, which is illegal in many places) gets arrested and sentenced to prison. Then they change the law, making what I did legal.

Will I be set free, or will I have to serve my sentence anyway?

 

[Recidiva]

You'll have to serve your sentence unless they give a separate amnesty or have a grandfather clause to the new law, I believe.

 

[neonlyte]

Trying to work out a plot twist in a play thingumie I'm working on, and I could use some help.

here's a scenario:
If I commit a crime, (for instance euthanasia, which is illegal in many places) gets arrested and sentenced to prison. Then they change the law, making what I did legal.

Will I be set free, or will I have to serve my sentence anyway?

I'm fairly sure it will depend on the date of legislation, laws are effective from the date of enactment unless there is a special provision backdating or pardening all previously sentenced.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

I'm fairly sure it will depend on the date of legislation, laws are effective from the date of enactment unless there is a special provision backdating or pardening all previously sentenced.

I think it would be only fair to include a provision for pardoning everybody convicted under the repealed law. That way, when the governor signs it, the pardon would be in effect. If it was vetoed by the gov. and passed over the veto, their might not be any pardon.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I think it would be only fair to include a provision for pardoning everybody convicted under the repealed law. That way, when the governor signs it, the pardon would be in effect. If it was vetoed by the gov. and passed over the veto, their might not be any pardon.

Fair, perhaps, although many would argue that the person still broke what had been the law and was thus properly punished at the time. Even so, it would be a good idea to have such an amnesty. However, I don't see that happening much in real life.

 

[zeb1094]

I think it would be only fair to include a provision for pardoning everybody convicted under the repealed law. That way, when the governor signs it, the pardon would be in effect. If it was vetoed by the gov. and passed over the veto, their might not be any pardon.

Since when is government fair! LOL!

 

[neonlyte]

I think it would be only fair to include a provision for pardoning everybody convicted under the repealed law. That way, when the governor signs it, the pardon would be in effect. If it was vetoed by the gov. and passed over the veto, their might not be any pardon.

Nah... legislation ought reflect the general prevailing attitude of a society at the time it was enacted. Generally the only time legislation is retroactive is financial legislation (bastards), technical correction or fault (eg speed camera proves faulty), or force majeure, circumstances unknown at the time of passing the legislation.

That it ought is no guarantee that it does

 

[oggbashan]

Most legislation, except tax generation, is not retrospective so a sentence under the law as it stood would still be valid.

Those transported to Australia under the laws of the time were not pardoned, nor repatriated when the laws were changed. It took six months for news of changed legislation to reach Australia and those transported didn't have the means to mount an appeal so they served their sentences to the end.

Tax laws are often changed to block previous loopholes that enabled tax avoidance (legal) or to stop tax evasion (illegal). The loopholes were generally closed retrospectively so arrangements made to avoid tax were made void and tax had to be paid.

Og

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Most legislation, except tax generation, is not retrospective so a sentence under the law as it stood would still be valid.

Those transported to Australia under the laws of the time were not pardoned, nor repatriated when the laws were changed. It took six months for news of changed legislation to reach Australia and those transported didn't have the means to mount an appeal so they served their sentences to the end.

Tax laws are often changed to block previous loopholes that enabled tax avoidance (legal) or to stop tax evasion (illegal). The loopholes were generally closed retrospectively so arrangements made to avoid tax were made void and tax had to be paid.

Og

As always, the government errs on the side of aiding its own causes.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Most legislation, except tax generation, is not retrospective so a sentence under the law as it stood would still be valid.


Tax laws are often changed to block previous loopholes that enabled tax avoidance (legal) or to stop tax evasion (illegal). The loopholes were generally closed retrospectively so arrangements made to avoid tax were made void and tax had to be paid.

Og

I hope nobody could be prosecuted for doing something at the time it was legal, even if it becale illegal later. I would think nobody would have to pay additional taxes after a loophole was closed because that would be ex post facto.

 

[neonlyte]

I hope nobody could be prosecuted for doing something at the time it was legal, even if it becale illegal later. I would think nobody would have to pay additional taxes after a loophole was closed because that would be ex post facto.

They do. The classic scenario, in UK, are so called 'Windfall Taxes' applied retrospectively on companies who made 'too much' profit. In the UK it has been used during the past decade to gather windfall taxes from Banks and Oil Companies. It is a simple clause attached to the Finance Act approved by UK parliament annually and in retrospect.

 

[oggbashan]

This government has also imposed taxes on family trusts set up to pay for education of minors or for nursing care for the elderly. These trusts were set up from taxed income and paid taxes on the investment income. Now they are taxed again when the trust pays out. They announced that 'only a few trusts would be affected'. It now appears that there are millions of such trusts and that the law is retrospective no matter when the trust was set up.

Much of the pension crisis in the UK has been caused by new taxes on investment by pension funds to provide future benefits. That has pushed company pension funds into apparent inability to meet future pension needs so the government introduced a levy on company pensions to pay out if the pension scheme collapses (but not to pay out for schemes that had already collapsed partly due to new taxes).

Almost every family owning a house in the UK is likely to pay inheritance tax if the proceeds are left to the children - tax on something the parents bought with taxed income. When introduced it applied to a few people who were rich enough to employ tax lawyers to avoid it. Now a majority of UK citizens face that tax.

Nothing is certain except death and taxes. The UK government taxes death as well.

Og

 

[Liar]

Thanks for the replies, fellas. It seems like I'll have to try a different plot bunny. Build a specal case for my story. Or maybe rethink it.

 

[Honey123]

You'd have to do an Appeal to the Court in the jurisdiction you were sentenced.

Also, did the character serve any time or was just sentenced?

Could be a good plot...Perhaps it can be a twist, where your attorney never mentioned that he/she is the son/daughter of the person you killed...(or put out of their misery)

Could be where the person who used you to euthenize their ULTRA RICH relative was the only heir and there was a clause in the will about being killed...or dying naturally...

Don't toss it just yet...think this through...I'm loving it..to be honest.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Depends very much on how the legislation is worded, also upon how it is changed.

If, for instance, someone else were accused of the same crime, went to court and proved the specific legislation, under which you too were charged, was illegal, then you and all others charged under that law would be freed.

If the legislature just changes the law, it depends on how it was written. By and large, political crimes, are generally accompanied by an anmesty. Criminal justice, in general, will not includ earn amnesty, following the rationale that you knowingly broke the law when you commited your crime, reguardless of it later being changed.

You may however, be released, with time served, if the provisions of then ew law allow for it. Even if they don't, you will, in general beable to get your sentnece reviewed and it may be lessened, in concert with the new law.

There are so many varriables, including what country you are in, what crime, etc.

 

[Liar]

You'd have to do an Appeal to the Court in the jurisdiction you were sentenced.

Also, did the character serve any time or was just sentenced?

Could be a good plot...Perhaps it can be a twist, where your attorney never mentioned that he/she is the son/daughter of the person you killed...(or put out of their misery)

Yes, my idea was to have a guy sentenced for first degree murder because he helped an old woman (possibly his mother) end her life, Kevorkian style.

Law is changed, he is pardoned, and the story is about how he deals with getting out into the world after a couple of years in prison. I wanted something like that kind of crime (or non-crime) because of what it says about him as a person. A non-violent person who stills is seen as a cold-blooded killer in many's eyes. And I didn't just want hin falsely convicted of a crime and have new evidence prove him innocent. Because that would also mean that people would react differently to him.

So, maybe it's plausible after all. The right court appeal or at least a shortened sentence could steer the story in the direction I want it.

I don't need the exact legalities surrounding it, since that is not going to be dwelled upon, it's told in first person by someone who shouldn't know that anyway more than I do. As long as it's not totally implausible...

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Maybe he could be a doctor who compassionately performed abortions under certain conditions. This would be before Roe versus Wade and he was caught and convicted. After the law was declared unconstitutional, he was released and was regarded as a hero by some and a killer by others.

 

[Honey123]

Yes, my idea was to have a guy sentenced for first degree murder because he helped an old woman (possibly his mother) end her life, Kevorkian style.

Law is changed, he is pardoned, and the story is about how he deals with getting out into the world after a couple of years in prison. I wanted something like that kind of crime (or non-crime) because of what it says about him as a person. A non-violent person who stills is seen as a cold-blooded killer in many's eyes. And I didn't just want hin falsely convicted of a crime and have new evidence prove him innocent. Because that would also mean that people would react differently to him.

So, maybe it's plausible after all. The right court appeal or at least a shortened sentence could steer the story in the direction I want it.

I don't need the exact legalities surrounding it, since that is not going to be dwelled upon, it's told in first person by someone who shouldn't know that anyway more than I do. As long as it's not totally implausible...

I think it is most definately doable...

Could be told from the lawyer's point of view or the prison guard who became his confident...maybe the guy ends up killing himself because of the guilt he begins to feel...can't live with the idea that he actually killed his mom/dad/sibling even though it was for a good cause....You can make it an erotic horror ~ so many possibilities with this story...it's exciting!

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I did a scenario in one series where a pot user is sent to prison for life, but only serves 5 years because the Federal Government collapses and the new, regional government legalizes pot and declares an amnesty for all pot users.

 

[R. Richard]

Nothing is certain except death and taxes.

Og

True, however, they are working on eliminating death.

 

[Honey123]

True, however, they are working on eliminating death.

I never, ever realized until this year that filing your income tax was VOLUNTARY....

I though you HAD TO file...

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I never, ever realized until this year that filing your income tax was VOLUNTARY....

I though you HAD TO file...

It's about as voluntary as paying your bills. You can refuse, but the Man will stick it to you for doing so.

 

[Honey123]

It's about as voluntary as paying your bills. You can refuse, but the Man will stick it to you for doing so.

I know I know...but still....could you imagine if everyone decided NOT to file?!?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I know I know...but still....could you imagine if everyone decided NOT to file?!?

I think that the word you're looking for is revolution!

 

[Honey123]

I think that the word you're looking for is revolution!

I'd don't look too shabby in fatigues....