|
| ▲ | granzymes 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The statute of limitations is not a trivial issue. Defendants have rights just as much as plaintiffs do, and our justice system does not allow plaintiffs to unreasonably delay in bringing their claims. |
| |
| ▲ | bobthepanda 32 minutes ago | parent [-] | | there are also practical concerns at play with a statute of limitations, where evidence is more likely to disappear and the trial would've devolved into a he said/she said situation. |
|
|
| ▲ | dbt00 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If it was wrong in 2019, why did he wait 7 years to do something about it? The passage of time makes it harder to have a fair trial, as shown by the number of times Elon said I don't know or I don't recall about conversations that would have been recent in 2019 but are now long (or strategically) forgotten. |
| |
|
| ▲ | mrhottakes 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Bringing claims promptly so they can be adjudicated is vital for justice. What would you think if you were sued for something that happened decades ago when the time to correct it was soon after the instigating event? |
|
| ▲ | brookst 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So you’d be OK if, say, a rental car sued you for putative damage to a car you rented 15 years ago? Limiting time that an action can be brought is critical to having a fair trial. |
|
| ▲ | danso 13 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| How do you imagine justice functioning in a system that lacks a statute of limitations? |
|
| ▲ | geodel 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It doesn't seem trivial at all. Allowing to flout procedure specially in case of very rich , powerful people with vast resources at their disposal would feel rewarding further for their cluelessness as if they are not already heavily rewarded by rigged system. |
|
| ▲ | albedoa an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I for one am happy that we have and enforce statutes of limitations. Calling it a kind of "trivial procedural grounds" is wild. > the court just doesn’t want to do its job. What do you think its job is. |