From: Philip Shaw <wahspilihp@gmail.com> To: Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> Cc: cpunks <cypherpunks@cpunks.org> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 6:11 PM Subject: Re: [OT] Note to new-ish subscribers: you joined a mailing list, not a "group". (fwd) On 20 Jan 2014, at 21:38 , Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
FYI now they make laws that are retroactive to indict - i know of a case (or 5 actually) where the law was made to indict and convict 2 years after the "crime" yup ppl went to fed prison for years ... seems the breech of the rule of law by the US has come more out of the shadows
Do you have a citation for those cases? I’m not doubting you, but the legal sophistry to argue that an ex post facto law was constitutional despite the explicit prohibition would be >interesting. I’ve heard of cases where higher penalties were applied than existed at the time (which IIRC is banned by the ECHR and possibly the CCPR, although is allowed in the USA >and elsewhere), or where statutes of limitations were extended, but a blatant ex post facto law seems surprising.
Yes, I too haven't seen any ex post facto law; however, as I recall ex post facto prohibition only works on criminal cases, not civil. I saw an indication of a criminal case where the limitations period was illegally extended. http://www.crimemagazine.com/firefighter-case-part-i I met two of these convicts while in prison, and I am absolutely convinced that they were falsely convicted. Worst, they were charged about 10 years after the crime, when the statute of limitations was about 5 years. There was no limitations period for crimes punishable by death, but the crime occurred during a time in which the Feds did not have a death penalty. Thus, the appeals court simply and deliberately violated the law. http://crimemagazine.com/analysis-8th-circuit-opinion-firefighters-case (However, on a skim I don't see reference to the statute of limitations issue here.) Jim Bell