In criminal law, kidnapping is the unlawful carrying away and confinement of a person against their will. Thus, it is a composite crime, it can be defined as false imprisonment by means of abduction, both of which are separate crimes that when committed upon the same person merge as the single crime of kidnapping. The asportation/abduction element is but not conducted by means of force or fear; that is, the perpetrator may use a weapon to force the victim into a vehicle, but it is still kidnapping if the victim is enticed to enter the vehicle willingly, e.g. in the belief it is a taxicab. Kidnapping may be done to demand for ransom in exchange for releasing the victim, or for other illegal purposes. Kidnapping can be accompanied by bodily injury. Kidnapping of a child is known as child abduction, these are sometimes separate legal categories. Kidnapping of children is by one parent against the wishes of a parent or guardian. Kidnapping of adults is for ransom or to force someone to withdraw money from an ATM, but may be for the purpose of sexual assault.
In the past, presently in some parts of the world, kidnapping is a common means used to obtain slaves and money through ransom. In less recent times, kidnapping in the form of shanghaiing men was used to supply merchant ships in the 19th century with sailors, whom the law considered unfree labour. Criminal gangs are estimated to make up to $500 million a year in ransom payments from kidnapping. Kidnapping has been identified as one source by which terrorist organizations have been known to obtain funding; the Perri and MacKenzie article identified "tiger" kidnapping as a specific method used by either the Real Irish Republican Army or Continuity Irish Republican Army, in which a kidnapped family member is used to force someone to steal from their employer. Bride kidnapping is a term applied loosely, to include any bride "abducted" against the will of her parents if she is willing to marry the "abductor", it still is traditional amongst certain nomadic peoples of Central Asia. It has seen a resurgence in Kyrgyzstan since the fall of the Soviet Union and the subsequent erosion of women's rights.
Express kidnapping is a method of abduction used in some countries from Latin America, where a small ransom, that a company or family can pay, is demanded. Tiger kidnapping is taking a hostage to make a loved one or associate of the victim do something: e.g. a child is taken hostage to force the shopkeeper to open the safe. The term originates from the long preceding observation, like a tiger does on the prowl. Kidnapping that does not result in a homicide is a hybrid offence that comes with a maximum possible penalty of life imprisonment. A murder that results from kidnapping is classified as 1st-degree, with a sentence of life imprisonment that results from conviction. Article 282 prohibits hostaging. Part 1 of Article 282 allows sentencing kidnappers to maximum imprisonment of 8 years or a fine of the fifth category. Part 2 allows maximum imprisonment of 9 years or a fine of the fifth category if there are serious injuries. Part 3 allows maximum imprisonment of 12 years or a fine of the fifth category if the victim has been killed.
Part 4 allows sentencing people. Part 1, 2 and 3 will apply to them. Kidnapping is an offence under the common law of Wales. Lord Brandon said in 1984 R v D: First, the nature of the offence is an attack on, infringement of, the personal liberty of an individual. Secondly, the offence contains four ingredients as follows: the taking or carrying away of one person by another. In all cases of kidnapping of children, where it is alleged that a child has been kidnapped, it is the absence of the consent of that child, material; this is the case regardless of the age of the child. A small child will not have the understanding or intelligence to consent; this means. It is a question of fact for the jury whether an older child has sufficient understanding and intelligence to consent. Lord Brandon said: "I should not expect a jury to find at all that a child under fourteen had sufficient understanding and intelligence to give its consent." If the child did consent to being taken or carried away, the fact that the person having custody or care and control of that child did not consent to that child being taken or carried away is immaterial.
If, on the other hand, the child did not consent, the consent of the person having custody or care and control of the child may support a defence of lawful excuse. It is known as Gillick competence. Regarding Restriction on prosecution, no prosecution may be instituted, except by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions, for an offence of kidnapping if it was committed against a child under the age of sixteen and by a person connected with the child, within the meaning of section 1 of the Child Abduction Act 1984. Kidnapping is an indictable-only offence. Kidnapping is punishable with fine at the discretion of the court. There is no limit on the fine or the term of imprisonment that may be imposed provided the sentence is not inordinate. A parent should only be prosecuted for kidnapping their own child "in exceptional cases
Assassination is the act of killing a prominent person for either political, religious or monetary reasons. An assassination may be prompted by political or military motives, it is an act that may be done for financial gain, to avenge a grievance, from a desire to acquire fame or notoriety, or because of a military, insurgent or secret police group's command to carry out the homicide. Acts of assassination have been performed since ancient times; the word assassin is believed to derive from the word Hashshashin, shares its etymological roots with hashish. It referred to a group of Nizari Shia Muslims. Founded by Hassan-i Sabbah, the Assassins were active in the fortress of Alamut in Persia from the 8th to the 14th centuries, expanded by capturing forts in Syria; the group killed members of the Abbasid, Seljuq and Christian Crusader elite for political and religious reasons. Although it is believed that Assassins were under the influence of hashish during their killings or during their indoctrination, there is debate as to whether these claims have merit, with many Eastern writers and an increasing number of Western academics coming to believe that drug-taking was not the key feature behind the name.
The earliest known use of the verb "to assassinate" in printed English was by Matthew Sutcliffe in A Briefe Replie to a Certaine Odious and Slanderous Libel, Lately Published by a Seditious Jesuite, a pamphlet printed in 1600, five years before it was used in Macbeth by William Shakespeare. Assassination is one of the oldest tools of power politics, it dates back at least as far as recorded history. In the Old Testament, King Joash of Judah was recorded as being assassinated by his own servants. Chanakya wrote about assassinations in detail in his political treatise Arthashastra, his student Chandragupta Maurya, the founder of the Maurya Empire made use of assassinations against some of his enemies, including two of Alexander the Great's generals and Philip. Other famous victims are Philip II of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great, Roman consul Julius Caesar. Emperors of Rome met their end in this way, as did many of the Muslim Shia Imams hundreds of years later; the practice was well known in ancient China, as in Jing Ke's failed assassination of Qin king Ying Zheng in 227 BC.
Whilst many assassinations were performed by individuals or small groups, there were specialized units who used a collective group of people to perform more than one assassination. The earliest were the sicarii in 6 A. D. who predated the Middle Eastern assassins and Japanese ninjas by centuries. In the Middle Ages, regicide was rare in Western Europe, but it was a recurring theme in the Eastern Roman Empire. Blinding and strangling in the bathtub were the most used procedures. With the Renaissance, tyrannicide—or assassination for personal or political reasons—became more common again in Western Europe. High medieval sources mention the assassination of King Demetrius Zvonimir, dying at the hands of his own people, who objected to a proposition by the Pope to go on a campaign to aid the Byzantines against the Seljuk Turks; this account is, contentious among historians, it being most asserted that he died of natural causes. The myth of the "Curse of King Zvonimir" is based on the legend of his assassination.
In 1192, Conrad of Montferrat, the de facto King of Jerusalem, was killed by an assassin. The reigns of King Przemysł II of Poland, William the Silent of the Netherlands, the French kings Henry III and Henry IV were all ended by assassins. In the modern world, the killing of important people began to become more than a tool in power struggles between rulers themselves and was used for political symbolism, such as in the propaganda of the deed. In Russia alone, two emperors, Paul I and his grandson Alexander II, were assassinated within 80 years. In the United Kingdom, only one Prime Minister has been assassinated—Spencer Perceval on May 11, 1812. In Japan, a group of assassins called the Four Hitokiri of the Bakumatsu killed a number of people, including Ii Naosuke, the head of administration for the Tokugawa shogunate, during the Boshin War. Most of the assassinations in Japan were committed with bladed weaponry, a trait, carried on into modern history. A video-record exists of the assassination of Inejiro Asanuma.
In the United States, within 100 years, four presidents—Abraham Lincoln, James A. Garfield, William McKinley and John F. Kennedy—died at the hands of assassins. There have been at least 20 known attempts on U. S. presidents' lives. Huey Long, a Senator, was assassinated on September 10, 1935. Robert F. Kennedy, a Senator and a presidential candidate, was assassinated on June 6, 1968 in the United States. In Austria, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie, Duchess of Hohenberg in Sarajevo on June 28, 1914, carried out by Gavrilo Princip, a Serbian national and a member of the Serbian nationalist insurgents, is blamed for igniting World War I after a succession of minor conflicts, while belligerents on both sides in World War II used operatives trained for assassination. Reinhard Heydrich died after an attack by British-trained Czechoslovak soldiers on behalf of the Czechoslovak government in exile in Operation Anthropoid, knowledge from decoded transmissions allowed the United States to carry out a targeted attack, killing Japanese Admiral
Criminal law is the body of law that relates to crime. It proscribes conduct perceived as threatening, harmful, or otherwise endangering to the property, health and moral welfare of people inclusive of one's self. Most criminal law is established by statute, to say that the laws are enacted by a legislature. Criminal law includes the rehabilitation of people who violate such laws. Criminal law varies according to jurisdiction, differs from civil law, where emphasis is more on dispute resolution and victim compensation, rather than on punishment or rehabilitation. Criminal procedure is a formalized official activity that authenticates the fact of commission of a crime and authorizes punitive or rehabilitative treatment of the offender; the first civilizations did not distinguish between civil law and criminal law. The first written codes of law were designed by the Sumerians. Around 2100–2050 BC Ur-Nammu, the Neo-Sumerian king of Ur, enacted the oldest written legal code whose text has been discovered: the Code of Ur-Nammu although an earlier code of Urukagina of Lagash is known to have existed.
Another important early code was the Code of Hammurabi. Only fragments of the early criminal laws of Ancient Greece have survived, e.g. those of Solon and Draco. In Roman law, Gaius's Commentaries on the Twelve Tables conflated the civil and criminal aspects, treating theft as a tort. Assault and violent robbery were analogized to trespass as to property. Breach of such laws created an obligation of law or vinculum juris discharged by payment of monetary compensation or damages; the criminal law of imperial Rome is collected in Books 47–48 of the Digest. After the revival of Roman law in the 12th century, sixth-century Roman classifications and jurisprudence provided the foundations of the distinction between criminal and civil law in European law from until the present time; the first signs of the modern distinction between crimes and civil matters emerged during the Norman Invasion of England. The special notion of criminal penalty, at least concerning Europe, arose in Spanish Late Scholasticism, when the theological notion of God's penalty, inflicted for a guilty mind, became transfused into canon law first and to secular criminal law.
The development of the state dispensing justice in a court emerged in the eighteenth century when European countries began maintaining police services. From this point, criminal law formalized the mechanisms for enforcement, which allowed for its development as a discernible entity. Criminal law is distinctive for the uniquely serious, potential consequences or sanctions for failure to abide by its rules; every crime is composed of criminal elements. Capital punishment may be imposed in some jurisdictions for the most serious crimes. Physical or corporal punishment may be imposed such as whipping or caning, although these punishments are prohibited in much of the world. Individuals may be incarcerated in prison or jail in a variety of conditions depending on the jurisdiction. Confinement may be solitary. Length of incarceration may vary from a day to life. Government supervision may be imposed, including house arrest, convicts may be required to conform to particularized guidelines as part of a parole or probation regimen.
Fines may be imposed, seizing money or property from a person convicted of a crime. Five objectives are accepted for enforcement of the criminal law by punishments: retribution, incapacitation and restoration. Jurisdictions differ on the value to be placed on each. Retribution – Criminals ought to Be Punished in some way; this is the most seen goal. Criminals have taken improper advantage, or inflicted unfair detriment, upon others and the criminal law will put criminals at some unpleasant disadvantage to "balance the scales." People submit to the law to receive the right not to be murdered and if people contravene these laws, they surrender the rights granted to them by the law. Thus, one who murders may be executed himself. A related theory includes the idea of "righting the balance." Deterrence – Individual deterrence is aimed toward the specific offender. The aim is to impose a sufficient penalty to discourage the offender from criminal behavior. General deterrence aims at society at large. By imposing a penalty on those who commit offenses, other individuals are discouraged from committing those offenses.
Incapacitation – Designed to keep criminals away from society so that the public is protected from their misconduct. This is achieved through prison sentences today; the death penalty or banishment have served the same purpose. Rehabilitation – Aims at transforming an offender into a valuable member of society, its primary goal is to prevent further offense by convincing the offender that their conduct was wrong. Restoration – This is a victim-oriented theory of punishment; the goal is to repair, through state authority, any injury inflicted upon the victim by the offender. For example, one who embezzles will be required to repay the amount improperly acquired. Restoration is combined with other main goals of criminal justice and is related to concepts in the civil law, i.e. returning the victim to his or her original position before the injury. Many laws are enforced by threat of criminal punishment, the range of the punishment varies with the jurisdiction; the scope of criminal law is too vast to catalog intelligently.
The following are some of the more typical aspects of criminal law. The criminal law prohibits undesirable acts. Thus, proof of a crime requires proof of some act. Scholars label this the requir
Child abuse or child maltreatment is physical, and/or psychological maltreatment or neglect of a child or children by a parent or a caregiver. Child abuse may include any act or failure to act by a parent or a caregiver that results in actual or potential harm to a child, can occur in a child's home, or in the organizations, schools or communities the child interacts with; the terms child abuse and child maltreatment are used interchangeably, although some researchers make a distinction between them, treating child maltreatment as an umbrella term to cover neglect and trafficking. Different jurisdictions have developed their own definitions of what constitutes child abuse for the purposes of removing children from their families or prosecuting a criminal charge. Definitions of what constitute child abuse vary among professionals, between social and cultural groups, as well as across time; the terms abuse and maltreatment are used interchangeably in the literature. Child maltreatment can be an umbrella term covering all forms of child abuse and child neglect.
Defining child maltreatment depends on prevailing cultural values as they relate to children, child development, parenting. Definitions of child maltreatment can vary across the sectors of society which deal with the issue, such as child protection agencies and medical communities, public health officials, researchers and child advocates. Since members of these various fields tend to use their own definitions, communication across disciplines can be limited, hampering efforts to identify, track and prevent child maltreatment. In general, abuse refers to acts of commission. Child maltreatment includes both acts of commission and acts of omission on the part of parents or caregivers that cause actual or threatened harm to a child; some health professionals and authors consider neglect as part of the definition of abuse, while others do not. Delayed effects of child abuse and neglect emotional neglect, the diversity of acts that qualify as child abuse, are factors; the World Health Organization defines child abuse and child maltreatment as "all forms of physical and/or emotional ill-treatment, sexual abuse, neglect or negligent treatment or commercial or other exploitation, resulting in actual or potential harm to the child's health, development or dignity in the context of a relationship of responsibility, trust or power."
In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention uses the term child maltreatment to refer to both acts of commission, which include "words or overt actions that cause harm, potential harm, or threat of harm to a child", acts of omission, meaning "the failure to provide for a child's basic physical, emotional, or educational needs or to protect a child from harm or potential harm". The United States federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act defines child abuse and neglect as, at minimum, "any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation" or "an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm"; the World Health Organization distinguishes four types of child maltreatment: physical abuse. Among professionals and the general public, people do not agree on what behaviors constitute physical abuse of a child. Physical abuse does not occur in isolation, but as part of a constellation of behaviors including authoritarian control, anxiety-provoking behavior, a lack of parental warmth.
The WHO defines physical abuse as: Intentional use of physical force against the child that results in – or has a high likelihood of resulting in – harm for the child's health, development or dignity. This includes hitting, kicking, biting, scalding, burning and suffocating. Much physical violence against children in the home is inflicted with the object of punishing. Joan Durrant and Ron Ensom write that most physical abuse is physical punishment "in intent and effect". Overlapping definitions of physical abuse and physical punishment of children highlight a subtle or non-existent distinction between abuse and punishment. For instance, Paulo Sergio Pinheiro writes in the UN Secretary-General's Study on Violence Against Children: Corporal punishment involves hitting children, with the hand or with an implement – whip, belt, wooden spoon, etc, but it can involve, for example, shaking or throwing children, pinching, pulling hair or boxing ears, forcing children to stay in uncomfortable positions, scalding or forced ingestion.
Most nations with child abuse laws deem the deliberate infliction of serious injuries, or actions that place the child at obvious risk of serious injury or death, to be illegal. Bruises, burns, broken bones, lacerations — as well as repeated "mishaps," and rough treatment that could cause physical injuries — can be physical abuse. Multiple injuries or fractures at different stages of healing can raise suspicion of abuse; the psychologist Alice Miller, noted for her books on child abuse, took the view that humiliations and beatings, slaps in the face, etc. are all forms of abuse, because they injure the
Incest is human sexual activity between family members or close relatives. This includes sexual activity between people in consanguinity, sometimes those related by affinity, clan, or lineage; the incest taboo is one of the most widespread of all cultural taboos, both in present and in past societies. Most modern societies have laws regarding incest or social restrictions on consanguineous marriages. In societies where it is illegal, consensual adult incest is seen by some as a victimless crime; some cultures extend the incest taboo to relatives with no consanguinity such as milk-siblings, step-siblings, adoptive siblings, albeit sometimes with less intensity. Third-degree relatives on average share 12.5% genes, sexual relations between them are viewed differently in various cultures, from being discouraged to being acceptable. Children of incestuous relationships have been regarded as illegitimate, are still so regarded in some societies today. In most cases, the parents did not have the option to marry to remove that status, as incestuous marriages were, are also prohibited.
A common justification for prohibiting incest is avoiding inbreeding: a collection of genetic disorders suffered by the children of parents with a close genetic relationship. Such children are at greater risk for congenital disorders and developmental and physical disability, that risk is proportional to their parents' coefficient of relationship—a measure of how the parents are related genetically, but cultural anthropologists have noted that inbreeding avoidance cannot form the sole basis for the incest taboo because the boundaries of the incest prohibition vary between cultures, not in ways that maximize the avoidance of inbreeding. In some societies, such as those of Ancient Egypt, brother–sister, father–daughter, mother–son, cousin–cousin, aunt–nephew, uncle–niece, other combinations of relations within a royal family were married as a means of perpetuating the royal lineage; some societies, such as the Balinese and some Inuit tribes, have different views about what constitutes illegal and immoral incest.
However, sexual relations with a first-degree relative are universally forbidden. The English word incest is derived from the Latin incestus, which has a general meaning of "impure, unchaste", it was introduced into Middle English, both in the generic Latin sense and in the narrow modern sense. The derived adjective incestuous appears in the 16th century. Before the Latin term came in, incest was known in Old English as sib-leger or mǣġhǣmed but in time, both words fell out of use. Terms like incester and incestual have been used to describe those interested or involved in sexual relations with relatives among humans, while inbreeder has been used in relation to similar behavior among non-human animals or organisms. Other words that describe sexual attraction to relatives include consanguinophilia, synegenesophilia and incestophilia. In ancient China, first cousins with the same surnames were not permitted to marry, while those with different surnames were. Several of the Egyptian Pharaohs had several children with them.
For example, Tutankhamun married his half-sister Ankhesenamun, was himself the child of an incestuous union between Akhenaten and an unidentified sister-wife. It is now accepted that sibling marriages were widespread among all classes in Egypt during the Graeco-Roman period. Numerous papyri and the Roman census declarations attest to many husbands and wives being brother and sister, of the same father and mother; the most famous of these relationships were in the Ptolemaic royal family. The fable of Oedipus, with a theme of inadvertent incest between a mother and son, ends in disaster and shows ancient taboos against incest as Oedipus is punished for incestuous actions by blinding himself. In the "sequel" to Oedipus, his four children are punished for their parents' incestuousness. Incest appears in the accepted version of the birth of Adonis, when his mother, Myrrha has sex with her father Cinyras during a festival, disguised as a prostitute. In Ancient Greece, Spartan King Leonidas I, hero of the legendary Battle of Thermopylae, was married to his niece Gorgo, daughter of his half-brother Cleomenes I.
Greek law allowed marriage between a sister if they had different mothers. For example, some accounts say. Incest is mentioned and condemned in Virgil's Aeneid Book VI: hic thalamum invasit natae vetitosque hymenaeos. Roman civil law prohibited marriages within four degrees of consanguinity but had no degrees of affinity with regards to marriage. Roman civil laws prohibited any marriage between parents and children, either in the ascending or descending line ad infinitum. Adoption was considered the same as affinity in that an adoptive father could not marry an unemancipated daughter or granddaughter if the adoption had been dissolved. Incestuous unions were considered nefas in ancient Rome. In AD 295 incest was explicitly forbidden by an imperial edict, which divided
In cultures that practice marital monogamy, bigamy is the act of entering into a marriage with one person while still married to another. Bigamy is a crime in most Western countries, when it occurs in this context neither the first nor second spouse is aware of the other. In countries that have bigamy laws, consent from a prior spouse makes no difference to the legality of the second marriage, considered void. Before Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire and Maximian passed strict anti-polygamy laws in 285 AD that mandated monogamy as the only form of legal marital relationship, as had traditionally been the case in classical Greece and Rome. In 393, the Byzantine Emperor Theodosius I issued an imperial edict to extend the ban on polygamy to Jewish communities. In 1000, Rabbi Gershom ben Judah ruled polygamy inadmissible within Ashkenazi Jewish communities living in a Christian environment. In ancient China, bigamy was a punishable offence. A man, at any given time, could only be married to one woman, vice versa.
Issue with the wife enjoyed preference in social status. Most western countries do not recognize polygamous marriages, consider bigamy a crime. Several countries prohibit people from living a polygamous lifestyle; this is the case in some states of the United States where the criminalization of a polygamous lifestyle originated as anti-Mormon laws, although they are enforced. In diplomatic law, consular spouses from polygamous countries are sometimes exempt from a general prohibition on polygamy in host countries. In some such countries, only one spouse of a polygamous diplomat may be accredited, however. Australia: Illegal. Up to 5 years' imprisonment. Belgium: Illegal. 5–10 years' imprisonment. Brazil: Illegal. 2–6 years' imprisonment. Canada: Illegal under the Criminal Code, sect 290. China: Illegal. Up to 2 years' imprisonment, up to 3 years for bigamy with soldiers. Colombia Illegal with exceptions. Although bigamy no longer exists as a lone figure in the Colombian judicial code marrying someone new without dissolving an earlier marriage may yield to other felonies such as civil status forgery or suppression of information.
Egypt: Legal if first wife consents Eritrea: Illegal. Up to 5 years' imprisonment. All the 27 countries of the European Union: Illegal. Iceland: Illegal according to the Icelandic Act on Marriage No. 31/1993, Art. 11. Germany: Illegal. Punishable. Ghana: Illegal. Up to six months' imprisonment. Hong Kong: Illegal. Up to 7 years' imprisonment. Republic of Ireland: Bigamy is a statutory offence, it is committed by a person who, being married to another person, goes through a ceremony capable of producing a valid marriage with a third person. The offence is created by section 57 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861; this section replaces section 26 of the Act 10 Geo. 4 c. 34 for the Republic of Ireland. India: Legal only for Muslims but rarely practiced. Up to ten years of imprisonment for others except in the state of Goa for Hindus due to its own civil code. Indonesia: Depending on the specific tribe in question, bigamy can be legal or illegal. Iran: Legal with consent of first wife. Practiced. Israel: Illegal for members of each confessional community.
Up to 5 years' imprisonment. Italy: Illegal. Up to 5 years' imprisonment. Libya: Legal with conditions. Malaysia: Illegal for non-Muslims under federal jurisdiction. Under section 494 of Chapter XX of the Penal Code, non-Muslim offenders found guilty of bigamy or polygamy shall be punished up to 7 years of imprisonment. Bigamy or polygamy is legal only for Muslims with restrictions under state jurisdiction practiced. Maldives: Permitted for anyone. Malta: Illegal under Marriage Act of 1975, section 6. Netherlands: Illegal. Up to 6 years' imprisonment. If the new partner is aware of the bigamy they can be imprisoned for a maximum of 4 years. New Zealand: Illegal. Up to 7 years' imprisonment, or up to 2 years' imprisonment if the judge is satisfied the second spouse was aware their marriage would be void. Morocco: Permitted for Muslims, restrictions apply. Pakistan: Polygamy in Pakistan is permitted with some restrictions. Philippines: Legal for Muslims. Others face 6–12 years' imprisonment and legal dissolution of marriage.
Romania: Illegal under Romanian Penal Code, art 376 and Civil Code of Romania, art 273. Saudi Arabia: Bigamy or polygamy is legal. South Africa: Legal under the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act, 1998 for customary marriages. Under civil law marriages, any marriage in addition to an existing one is invalid. Somalia: Polygamy is legal at marriage courts. Taiwan: Illegal. Up to 5 years' imprisonment. Thailand: Prior to October 1, 1935, polygamy in Thailand could be practiced and recognised under civil law. Since its abolition, it is still practiced and accepted in Thailand, though no longer recognised, as the law states "A man or a woman cannot marry each other while one of them has a spouse." Tunisia: Illegal. Up to 5 years' imprisonment. Turkey: Illegal. Up to 5 years' imprisonment. United Kingdom: Illegal, although marriages performed abroad may be recognised for some legal purposes. On indictment, up to 7 years' imprisonment or on summary conviction up to 6 months' imprisonment, or to a fine of a prescribed sum, or to both.
United States: Illegal in every state. Up to 5 years' imprisonment. Uzbekistan: Il
An obscenity is any utterance or act that offends the prevalent morality of the time. It is derived from the Latin obscaena a cognate of the Ancient Greek root skene, because some offensive content, such as murder or sex, was depicted offstage in classical drama; the word can be used to indicate a strong moral repugnance, in expressions such as "obscene profits" or "the obscenity of war". As a legal term, it refers to graphic depictions of people engaged in sexual and excretory activity. In the United States of America, issues of obscenity raise issues of limitations on the freedom of speech and of the press, which are otherwise protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Federal obscenity law in the U. S. is unusual in. Former Justice Potter Stewart of the Supreme Court of the United States, in attempting to classify what material constituted "what is obscene," famously wrote, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced... ut I know it when I see it...."
In the United States, the 1973 ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States in Miller v. California established a three-tiered test to determine what was obscene—and thus not protected, versus what was erotic and thus protected by the First Amendment. Delivering the opinion of the court, Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote: The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct defined by the applicable state law. While most recent obscenity cases in the United States have revolved around images and films, the first obscenity cases dealt with textual works; the classification of "obscene" and thus illegal for production and distribution has been judged on printed text-only stories starting with "Dunlop v. U. S. 165 U. S. 486", which upheld a conviction for mailing and delivery of a newspaper called the'Chicago Dispatch,' containing "obscene, lewd and indecent materials", upheld in several cases.
One of these was "A Book Named John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure" v. Attorney General of Com. of Massachusetts, "383 U. S. 413" written by John Cleland c. 1760, was judged to be obscene in a proceeding that put the book itself on trial rather than its publisher. Another was "Kaplan v. California, 413 U. S. 115" whereby the court most famously determined that "Obscene material in book form is not entitled to any First Amendment protection because it has no pictorial content." In 2005, the U. S. Department of Justice formed the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force in a push to prosecute obscenity cases. Red Rose Stories, a site dedicated to text-only fantasy stories, became one of many sites targeted by the FBI for shutdown; the government alleged. The publisher pleaded guilty. Extreme pornographer Max Hardcore served 30 months of a 46-month prison sentence for obscenity. Many U. S. states have had bans on the sale of sex toys, regulating them as obscene devices. Some states have seen their sex toy bans ruled unconstitutional in the courts.
That ruling leaves only Mississippi and Virginia with current bans on the sale of obscene devices. Literature communicating contraceptive information was prohibited by several states; the last such prohibition, in Connecticut, was overturned judicially in 1965. In 1957, two associates of acclaimed poet Allen Ginsberg were arrested and jailed for selling his book "Howl and Other Poems" to undercover police officers at a beatnik bookstore in San Francisco; the California Supreme Court declared the literature to be of "redeeming social value" and therefore not classifiable as "obscene". Because the poem "Howl" contains pornographic slang and overt references to drugs and homosexuality, the poem was censored and confiscated. FCC v. Pacifica better known as the landmark "seven dirty words" case. In that ruling, the Court found that only "repetitive and frequent" use of the words in a time or place when a minor could hear can be punished. In State v. Henry, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that the Oregon state law that criminalized obscenity was an unconstitutional restriction of free speech under the free speech provision of the Oregon Constitution, with the ruling making Oregon the "first state in the nation to abolish the offense of obscenity."
In Reno v. ACLU, the Supreme Court struck down indecency laws applying to the Internet. In Miller v. California - the currently-binding Supreme Court precedent on the issue - the Court ruled materials were obscene if they appealed, "to a prurient interest", showed "patently offensive sexual conduct", defined by a state obscenity law, "lacked serious artistic, political, or scientific value." Decisions regarding whether material was obscene should be based on local, not national, standards. Standards superseded by the Miller Test include: Wepplo: If material has a substantial tendency to deprave or corrupt its readers by inciting lascivious thoughts or arousing lustful desires.. Hicklin test: the effect of isolated passages upon the most susceptible persons. (British common law, cited in Regina v. Hicklin, 1868. LR 3 QB 360 - overturned when Michigan