(cross out jest-tie) n. from Latin for “things done”, it means all the circumstances that surround and are related to an event. The res gestae of a crime thus includes the immediate environment and all events and statements immediately after the act. Statements made in the context of the resgestae of a crime or accident may be admitted in court, even if they are “hearsay”, because spontaneous statements are reliable in these circumstances. This is a fairly formal usage. Instead of “inside,” you usually use indoors. If something is within a certain limit, it does not exceed that limit or is not more than what is allowed. Do not confuse indoors with through. If you do something at a certain time, you have done it at that time or before. In the U.S. legal system, a person accused of violating a law must have committed acts expressly regulated by law.

If a person`s actions conform to the language of the law, the actions are called “within the law.” When you are in something, you are in it or surrounded by it. If something happens in a certain amount of time, it happens before that period of time is up. Includes or falls within the scope of a particular statute. In criminal law, courts apply the mile rule to deal with ambiguities in criminal law. The general rule is that an ambiguity in a criminal law must be resolved in favour of the accused. Therefore, a court will choose the most lenient interpretation when determining the sentence. However, problematic issues arise when a law is too general or not specific enough to inform about prohibited acts. For example, vagrant laws have been used to arrest and detain people who police believe have committed or are committing crimes. A person could be arrested because they do not have a permanent residence or because they move “aimlessly” on the streets. However, in Papachristou v. Jacksonville, 405 U.S.

156, 92 pp. Ct. 839, 31 L. Ed. 2d 110 (1972), the United States Supreme Court ruled that a vagrant law in Florida was unconstitutional because it was too vague to be understood. The court emphasized that a person cannot avoid criminal conduct if he or she cannot determine before committing the commission that the conduct is prohibited by law.