Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2012 May 25

= May 25 =

"backcharge wealth-getting fee"
This is apparently the charge or fee or tax for attaining an asset, such as a house, which must be paid, regardless of whether the person in question makes money on the asset or loses money on it. What is the proper legal word for this fee or charge? KägeTorä - (影虎) ( TALK )  19:10, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Can you provide more context, please? Such as:  Where did you see that?  What country is this in?  RudolfRed (talk) 19:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Stamp duty. Sleigh (talk) 23:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Huh ? There was no mention of stamps in this question.  Sounds more like a sales tax, to me.  If the tax is exclusively on high-end purchases, this could also be called a luxury tax. StuRat (talk) 02:32, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Stamp duty is levied on documents, like a contract for buying a house. Sleigh (talk) 02:37, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Note also, as the article says stamp duty doesn't necessarily mean physical stamps are used nowadays (so it may no longer formally be called stamp duty, but it's still the same thing so discussed in our article). Nil Einne (talk) 04:47, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Legal aspects of Etan Patz's case
Does the Statute of limitation apply? Apparently the murderer was charged with second-degree murder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.9.106.109 (talk) 23:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Most US states have no statute of limitation on murder. If you're asking why it's second degree, I think that's a peculiarity of New York law, which reserves the first degree of murder for murder of a peace officer or some such.  At least that's my impression from watching Law & Order; maybe a New York lawyer can chime in and make things more precise. --Trovatore (talk) 23:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Both questions are interesting. I thought statute of limitation was void only on first degree murder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.9.106.109 (talk) 23:24, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This is very much state-by-state. We need someone who knows specifically about New York. --Trovatore (talk) 23:50, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Google turned up this page, which has a bunch of legalese about homicide laws in New York. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:28, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * There are very few things that are outside the statute of limitations, but homicide and treason are the obvious exceptions. It's the same in many states. I don't know about New York. Lest we get into some debate about statutes of limitation, generally the statutes "tolls" for victims that are "incompetent", which would mean that the time people are minors/insane/unable-to-act-for-themselves the time is suspended, and there are exceptions for specific types of evidence like DNA based evidence in some states. Shadowjams (talk) 00:44, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The section you want to read if you really want to get into it is 18 U.S.C. 3281-3301. That's federal, not New York, of course. Read for something kinda interesting. Shadowjams (talk) 00:49, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * For New York, a simple search finds  which suggest there is no limitation for any form of murder or other class A felony. However I emphasise it can get complicated, per     and the earlier sources, it seems clear the statute for rape has been extended but it sounds like this extension only applied to cases for which it hadn't run out. (There is of course the general acceptance you shouldn't criminalise things which hadn't been before or similarly extend punishments retrospectively since it's unfair, but this isn't really the same thing since the actions were already crimes and the punishments aren't really changed. So it may be the statute was sometimes extended retrospectively. In DNA cases in particular, I presume it often was since it sounds like one of the reasons was because DNA wasn't available at the time.)
 * Personally I doubt there was ever a limitation for murder, but if there was it could mean the 'no limitation' doesn't apply. However I think we can assume the prosecutor isn't totally incompetent nor is the defence attorney, so we have some of the best evidence that either no limitations apply to the second degree murder charge here or if they do, they are longer then the 33 years or so since the murder.
 * There could be other complications, e.g. I believe it's common an accidental killing during the commission of a kidnapping (or often other felony) is a murder. If it wasn't the same thing 33 years ago in New York, then this may make a murder charge difficult if the killing wasn't intentional.
 * Nil Einne (talk) 05:30, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your research. Constitutionally, statues of limitation are subject to the ex post facto clause, and so what was in place at the time is relevant at the time of the indictment. Shadowjams (talk) 06:36, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * "an accidental killing during the commission ... is a murder.": Felony murder rule -- 71.35.105.132 (talk) 19:28, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Franco-Tahitian War and the Leeward Island Wars
How come so little attention is paid toward this bloody period of French history? The first war occured in the 1840s and the latter in the 1880s in the Society Islands of French Polynesia between France and the four native kingdoms there. Are the natives resentful of continued colonial rule? --KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * So little attention is because it was long ago and far away (unless you happen to live there). StuRat (talk) 02:36, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That's precisely true of the American Civil War and the French and Russian Revolutions, too, but there's lots still being written about them, and not all by Americans, French people or Russians either. Every conflict you could possibly name was far away from some significant group of people, and most of them were long ago, so that's saying nothing, Stu.  --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  20:56, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * A lot more books were written and movies made by people who lived near American Civil War sites than those who lived near Frano-Tahitian War sites. This explains why it's a more popular topic in both.  The same applies to the French and Russian revolutions.  StuRat (talk) 22:35, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The only mention our articles make of hostilities is that a French gunboat was sent there in 1838 after their missionaries were expelled. I don't doubt that there was violence, but it must have been at a rather small scale.  Consider that around 600,000 people died in the American Civil War, and the first census we have in our article put the entire population of French Polynesia at 30,600 in 1907.  Even if we allow for a higher initial native population, with many dying from European diseases, the total population must have been less than 600,000.  So, it looks like far fewer people died there. StuRat (talk) 00:06, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Middle Class Indians & Immigration to America
Hi. Let's suppose the American and Canadian government relax their immigration policies for Indian citizens in India. How many middle class Indian citizens could pay the immigration application fees and then buy one-way flight tickets to come to North America today? 99.245.12.186 (talk) 23:36, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * For any reasonable definition of "middle-class", the answer would surely be "all of them", so numerically it would be equal to the number of whatever definition of "middle-class Indians" you're using. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.211 (talk) 09:53, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note however to the OP, the fact they could pay it doesn't mean they will, it's unlikely all Indians in any resonable definition of middle class want to immigrate to North America. Nil Einne (talk) 14:34, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps some don't want to immigrate and some do want to immigrate. But India is facing a high inflation rate now. If Middle Class Indians are making money which goes to their foods, transport, education and etc, could they still pay the application processing fees and the flight tickets to North America now? Is a flight ticket expensive in India? 99.245.12.186 (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2012 (UTC)


 * This is a bit of an academic question because surly most 'Middle Class Indians' would be able to maintain a higher standard of living in India. So there is little or no economic reason to emigrate to the US.--Aspro (talk) 19:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The biggest cost in emigrating is not buying a plane ticket or paying for processing fees, which are quite reasonable. It's the cost of uprooting your whole life and posessions and starting over from scratch in a new country. It may take many years before a middle class immigrant achieves a comparable standard of living in North America, if he ever does, and often immigrants do it for the sake of their kids' future, not for their own well-being. It's a bit different for someone who starts off with nothing in his home country, and thus really is not losing any status by starting at the bottom rung of the ladder in North America. --Xuxl (talk) 08:30, 28 May 2012 (UTC)