3 legal questions?

[JMISBEST]

Hi

I have 4 legal questions relating to Laws in Traveller. Can you help me?

1st is that if a man commits a crime on a planet at a time when the crime it carries the death penalty, but is not convicted until after the penalty has been lessened to life with a minimum of 30 years do they get the sentence that applies nor or the sentence that applied when they committed the crime

2nd is if a man who is dying of cancer is beaten to a inch of his life and dies in hospital, but from the cancer not the beating, does the attacker/attackers get charged with/for GBH, attempted murder or murder

3rd is if a man commits a crime on 1 planet then goes back to his home planet where what he did is not illegal. For example A Noble kills, in cold blood and in a very violent and very bloody way, someone either of common blood or someone who is a noble by either adoption or marriage not birth who tried to rob, cheat or defraud him as a example to others

4th is if A Australian Themed Planet has extreme food importation laws that require permits for all foods, even for something like chewing gum, do you need a permit to bring in food that came from the planet in the 1st place. For example a man goes on holiday for 4 months, takes some of The Aussies themed planets wine in case he doesn't like the local wine, likes the local stuff and tries to bring The Aussies themed planet's wine back without a permit

 

[Condottiere]

I would guess it depends on the statute at the time the crime was committed, though the prosecution and/or the jury may opt to go for the life sentence, if they had a choice and it was politically expedient to do so.

If a person dies through the actions of the accused, it's usually homicide; the degree would depend on intent, premeditation and circumstances.

Extradition treaties usually govern if someone is eligible to be sent back for trial; sometimes actions that would not be criminal on the home planet would not be subject to extradition.

They execute non-customized dogs in Australia, or at least threaten to; bringing stuff in illegally is breaking the law, so subject to confiscation, fines and/or jail time, if caught.

 

[Infojunky]

1st is that if a man commits a crime on a planet at a time when the crime it carries the death penalty, but is not convicted until after the penalty has been lessened to life with a minimum of 30 years do they get the sentence that applies nor or the sentence that applied when they committed the crime

Common Law would hold to the penalty at the time of the trial. In the Imperium it is up to the individual worlds Justice system.

2nd is if a man who is dying of cancer is beaten to a inch of his life and dies in hospital, but from the cancer not the beating, does the attacker/attackers get charged with/for GBH, attempted murder or murder

Most likely not murder but Manslaughter.... GBH is a given. But again depends on the world's Laws...

3rd is if a man commits a crime on 1 planet then goes back to his home planet where what he did is not illegal. For example A Noble kills, in cold blood and in a very violent and very bloody way, someone either of common blood or someone who is a noble by either adoption or marriage not birth who tried to rob, cheat or defraud him as a example to others

4th is if A Australian Themed Planet has extreme food importation laws that require permits for all foods, even for something like chewing gum, do you need a permit to bring in food that came from the planet in the 1st place. For example a man goes on holiday for 4 months, takes some of The Aussies themed planets wine in case he doesn't like the local wine, likes the local stuff and tries to bring The Aussies themed planet's wine back without a permit
[/quote]

Again, it depend's on the world's involved. And in the case of Number 3 how pissed off said dead persons noble friends and relations take it, and if they can accumulate enough clout to get a charge to court. By Court in this case would be in front of a Higher Noble not a local planetary one.

 

[Epicenter]

By evidence, there appears to be three separate legal systems in the Imperium.

The first are local laws - these are the laws that drafted by members of the Imperium and apply to wherever these groups have power. This typically means that a planet may have a set of unique laws.

There is Imperial High Law which is suggested in the more "unitary state" versions of the Imperium, such as Lorenverse (may he rest in peace) as presented in GURPS. Imperial High Law stipulates certain legal things which apply to all worlds in the Imperium, regardless of their local laws, such as a banning of chattel slavery. Canon evidence suggests that there are not many elements of Imperial High Law. However, the OOC application of Imperial High Law appears to be pretty uneven. A lot of adventure authors and players (even those on this board) who lean towards the view that the Imperium is like a vast United States seem to often assume a near total domination of Imperial High Law across all Imperial worlds.

Then there's the laws that which apply in Imperial territory, something I think of "Imperial Common Law." The Imperium does have areas where only its law applies - the most notable example are starports, which are pointed out as having extraterritoriality from they are on (similarly, Imperial Naval or Scout bases likely have large civilian populations that provide economic support on "Imperial" moons or something). There has to be some sort of law in these places. As Imperial High Law is broad and appears to have limited areas of application, this "Imperial Common Law" must be much more comprehensive Imperial High Law and apply to things as varied as how many days are in a week, worker's rights, to anything else that has laws. (By implication, I've always assumed that Imperial Common Law is actually followed on a lot of planets -- especially worlds that depend on a lot of off-world trade or tourism have probably adopted such laws over any native traditions. It's much easier to get visitors if they know what they can legally expect from a world and trade and business require stable legal environments to thrive in.)

If a crime is committed on a world unique legal system, then the local laws would apply.

If the crime is committed in an area where Imperial Common Law would apply, I'd say go with the legal precedent that is the most familiar to you and your players.

3rd is if a man commits a crime on 1 planet then goes back to his home planet where what he did is not illegal. For example A Noble kills, in cold blood and in a very violent and very bloody way, someone either of common blood or someone who is a noble by either adoption or marriage not birth who tried to rob, cheat or defraud him as a example to others

In this case, he may get away with it. If Planet 1 and the home planet don't have an extradition treaty, then it's likely that the government of Planet 1 will request extradition of the Noble for prosecution. It's likely the noble's homeworld will refuse. Planet 1 may then appeal to Imperial nobility to put pressure on the home planet for extradition. However, should this not work (which I think there's a good cahnce of it not working), the Noble is likely to get away with it. There's a good chance the noble would never be able to return to Planet 1 and may be unwelcome on others that sympathize with Planet 1, but on many others he'd fine again.

 

[locarno24]

Imperial High Law stipulates certain legal things which apply to all worlds in the Imperium, regardless of their local laws, such as a banning of chattel slavery. Canon evidence suggests that there are not many elements of Imperial High Law. However, the OOC application of Imperial High Law appears to be pretty uneven. A lot of adventure authors and players (even those on this board) who lean towards the view that the Imperium is like a vast United States seem to often assume a near total domination of Imperial High Law across all Imperial worlds.

Ultimately Imperial High Law is the law - it's just unofficially ignored or not enforced in some areas, due to politics, lack of resources, whatever. But in a suitably high profile case, or if you somehow make the Imperial Ministry Of Justice 'notice', that's the standard which will be applied if people take matters seriously (think those theoretically dry bits of the middle east where drinking in western ex-pat compounds blatantly happens but no-one really pays attention unless someone is caught visibly drunk outside said compounds)

We have no real feel for the details of imperial law, but you can draw parallels from modern international law.

1st is that if a man commits a crime on a planet at a time when the crime it carries the death penalty, but is not convicted until after the penalty has been lessened to life with a minimum of 30 years do they get the sentence that applies nor or the sentence that applied when they committed the crime

If the law specifies a punishment, the law is telling the judge "this is the maximum/minimum sentence you can give for crime X". The judge has to make pronouncements which are legal at the point he makes them, regardless of what the law previously may have said, or may say tomorrow.

2nd is if a man who is dying of cancer is beaten to a inch of his life and dies in hospital, but from the cancer not the beating, does the attacker/attackers get charged with/for GBH, attempted murder or murder

GBH/Attempted Murder (depending); if it is provable that his death was due to the cancer, they did not cause his death.
Proving this is where the grey area is. If he died from his cancer because he was so weakened by his injuries, for example, his injuries may be arguable as the primary contributing factor in his death.

3rd is if a man commits a crime on 1 planet then goes back to his home planet where what he did is not illegal. For example A Noble kills, in cold blood and in a very violent and very bloody way, someone either of common blood or someone who is a noble by either adoption or marriage not birth who tried to rob, cheat or defraud him as a example to others

Who is irrelevant - either it's illegal or not on the world he did it. If it is, he's a criminal and will be sought for prosecution. If he's no longer on the world, then it's a question of trying to extradite him (legally) or seize him depending on the resources, levels of influence, and pre-existing treaties between worlds A and B. Depending on what happens, he may find his homeworld either ignoring the demands, or turning him over, or pressuring him to turn himself over, or he may in extreme cases find himself taken by force.

4th is if A Australian Themed Planet has extreme food importation laws that require permits for all foods, even for something like chewing gum, do you need a permit to bring in food that came from the planet in the 1st place. For example a man goes on holiday for 4 months, takes some of The Aussies themed planets wine in case he doesn't like the local wine, likes the local stuff and tries to bring The Aussies themed planet's wine back without a permit

Depends on the details of the law. A world with extreme food importation laws presumably has them for a reason (suppressing the migration of parasites, for example). If you export the items in the first place, and you have it hermetically sealed, and you can prove said seals have never been broken, then it'll be fine. People import food into Australia all the time; you just need the evidence to support the issue said permits to do it (which if you're importing stuff in sealed pallets on a sealed container commercially is fine). What you can't do is throw stuff into a suitcase.

If a gut is going on holiday, I sincerely doubt he'd bother with that much effort - he'd just have 'normal' bottles of wine in his luggage, so he'd probably have to throw them away (or at least leave them on the highport or give/sell them to the starship crew).

 

[Condottiere]

The questions were vague, and even if the planets were identified, most worlds aren't detailed in Traveller anyway.

 

[Nobby-W]

Depends on the details of the law. A world with extreme food importation laws presumably has them for a reason (suppressing the migration of parasites, for example). If you export the items in the first place, and you have it hermetically sealed, and you can prove said seals have never been broken, then it'll be fine. People import food into Australia all the time; you just need the evidence to support the issue said permits to do it (which if you're importing stuff in sealed pallets on a sealed container commercially is fine). What you can't do is throw stuff into a suitcase.

New Zealand is just like that - they're very paranoid about bio-security. Customs: WMDs, explosives, narcotics, obscene literature - meh. Bring fruit into the country and it's not Customs you have to answer to, it's MAF.

If the beagles like the smell of your bag - it's the rubber gloves for you, matey.

 

[Condottiere]

The Australians burned what was probably a priceless collection of dried flowers on loan from some French museum, dating back to the nineteenth century.

 

[locarno24]

The Australians burned what was probably a priceless collection of dried flowers on loan from some French museum, dating back to the nineteenth century.

Which is fair enough if no-one asked customs and excise if they were acceptable to bring in... if they had done, I'd imagine they'd never have left France!

And whilst it can be taken to extremes in some countries, in a Traveller universe where you've got the micro-ecology of an entire galaxy plus nanotech plus combinations of the two to go at, it's a fairly sensible starting policy. "You're a scout service archaeologist who's spent most of the last two years poking around a dig on an ancient battlefield where weapons of mass destruction were employed, and you want to come onto our planet 'for some downtime'? Please step this way first, I think....."

 

[Condottiere]

I imagine the full treatment would be stuffing Travellers into bacta tanks for a six month quarantine period, with daily enemas.