Recently in Italy, former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi was sentenced to seven years in prison following his sex scandal trial.  The Premier, famous for the sheer number of charges that have been brought against him and, even more so, for how very few of them have stuck, was convicted of having sex with 17 year-old prostitute Karima El Mahroug as well as abusing his power while in office.

According to prosecutors, Berlusconi paid to have sex with el Mahroug, now 20, who is better known as “Ruby the heart-stealer,” after she participated in one of his famous “bunga bunga” parties.  Of course, both el Mahroug and Berlusconi deny the allegations, stating that they never had sex.

The sentence is not yet permanent and can still be appealed by Berlusconi, but it is still noteworthy in that it is one of the few cases (out of many) brought against Berlusconi that actually resulted in conviction.  Berlusconi may owe his winning streak to Italy’s legal system.  In Italy, Defendants are allowed to have two different appeals after the initial trial and, in light of how long this takes, the Italian Judicial System is infamous for being slow moving, often resulting in lapses in the applicable Statute of Limitations (the time limit within which a charge can be brought against a person).

The Italian Statute of Limitations is very odd when compared to the United States’.  Usually, in the United States, the time limit “runs” only until a complaint is filed and a person is charged.  The Plaintiff must file the complaint within the time period designated by the laws surrounding the specific alleged crime and the Defendant has a right to Speedy Trial.  But the Plaintiff does not, per se, have to worry about the Statute of Limitations expiring while they are prosecuting the case.  Italy seems to be the exact opposite.  Article 157 of the Italian penal code limits the amount of time for the prosecution of all crimes in Italy excepting some felonies.  These felonies are the crimes that are serious enough to trigger life in prison sentences.  In Italy, the Statute of Limitations continues to run until the trial ends, which gives ample opportunity for the defendant to stall and force the trial to go on longer past the Statute of Limitations to avoid a conviction.

This short Statute of Limitations in Italy is meant to be an incentive to speed up the extremely slow moving Judicial System.  However, it also allows many Defendants to escape charges on a technicality– regardless of whether they are guilty or innocent.  While no legal system is perfect, had these laws been in place in the United States, prior decisions would have ended very differently.  Imagine if the Steubenville Rape case were dismissed for exceeding the time limits.  Even though there is documented video and photos of the two football players raping an incapacitated 16 year-old girl, the case would have been dismissed because of the Statute of Limitations.  The girl and her family could be denied justice for the crimes against her, which, under United States Statute of Limitations law, would not and did not happen.

This goes to show how much the law can differ throughout the world and how even seemingly slight differences in law can drastically change the results of a legal dispute in other countries and, perhaps, the course of history as well.