There is a bundle of Latin terms which are tossed around in the legal profession, some of which have been adopted into the regular parlance of American English. One of those words is ex post facto, which is (literally) defined as “after the fact.“ The fact that it is used regularly in our language does not mean that people understand what it means, however. Let me give you an imaginary example from which we can work:
A man is arrested in 2013 on the charge of jury tampering. He is accused of having bribed a juror to vote to acquit a woman standing trial in 2009 for negligance, having left her 3 year old child alone when she went to work in the evening. She was aquitted of the charges and released, although there seemed to be sufficient evidence to convict her. Now, in 2014, the man, her live-in-partner, is arrested on a charge of breaking and entering, and during his examination he acknowledges that he did bribe the juror back in 2009, and that his girlfriend had, indeed, left the child alone for four hours on the evening of her arrest. He is remanded to jail and at the time of his trial is found guilty of jury tampering. The judge sentences him to jail for 10-20 years, the punishment prescribed in 2013 for such a conviction. However, upon appeal, his lawyer points out that in 2009, when the act was committed, the punishment was only 5-10 years, and asks for the sentence to be reduced appropriately. He bases his argument upon the principle of ex post facto, in that a person cannot be punished by a sentence which was not in place at the time of his crime. “
Now, let’s be clear. This is a simplistic story, and I’m not an attorney. It’s just an illustration, and I hope it helps make the definition of ex post facto somewhat clearer for you.
But, let’s move away from the court room and find ourselves in the living room.
Margaret, a 16 year old daughter of the family, has just come in from an evening with her friends. It is after midnight when she walks through the door. Her parents confront her, and the expected conflict arises. In the end, she is “punished” by being grounded for two weekends. She objects on the basis that there was no conversation prior to the evening which laid out the circumstances of expectations for her. She wasn’t told what time to return, and there was no indication of any punishment for using bad judgment in staying out late. “
There are no “laws” regarding this. It is strictly a matter of parent/child agreements and responsibilities. It would appear that there are circumstances on both sides of the argument which apply. But the question arises…if there were no stipulations of time and punishment in advance, is it fair to assess them “ex post facto“...that is…after the fact? A lot depends upon the prior relationship between Margaret and her parents, and the way in which previous infractions have been dealt with. Margaret may have a point, in terms of logic. But if this is a household where autocratic rules apply, and that has been the circumstance prior to tonight, she may have a tough time winning this argument. She should have expected some kind of retaliation.
You can begin to see that this is not simply a courtroom word. It has application to everyday life. There are surely other examples to be cited, some of which are much less stressful, but which arise spontaneously in family life. The same can be said for the workplace, schools, organizations, and communities. It happens all the time that those “in charge” want to go back to a prior time to define a violation of something, but want to assess a punishment which did not apply at the time. Sometimes it is a subtle difference…sometimes it is not so subtle.
Life can be difficult.
Photo Credit: JSchultz & Associates
There are words that belong in our lexicon, but for which we have no specific information about their origin. They just appear, get repeated over and over, and…the next thing you know…they become a natural part of the vocabulary we employ on a day-t0-day basis.
Such is the case for the word malarkey.
It is a word that came into existence in the 1930′s, according to some dictionaries. Nobody really knows the origin of the word. And, no, there is no famous person named Malarkey for whom the word is a known reference point. My suspicion is that it is part of the anti-Irish slang that was common in that part of our less-than-noble history. Malarkey sounds like an Irish name to me.
My speculation is that someplace along the line some boozer took a verbal shot at his Irish-American drinking partner who was known to exaggerate the truth when he had downed a few pints of the brew. Mind you, that’s just a speculation. It might make for an interesting piece of fiction, though. Hmmmm.
The term became famous in the 2012 Presidential Campaign when Vice-President Joe Biden was running for office against Republican Representative Paul Ryan. At one point in the October 11 debate the VP took issue with Representative Ryan and said the now-famous words, “With all due respect, that’s a bunch of malarkey.” The respect issue is debatable, but the meaning of the term is not. He was saying that what Ryan was spouting as “the truth” was really a bunch of bologna. (I’m being kind.) The Vice-President is known to shoot from the hip at times, not waiting to check the veracity of his statements, so he may, or may not, have been correct in his assessment of Mr. Ryan’s message. It didn’t matter. The folksy nature of the comment was memorable, and it played a role in his participation in the debate.
And that’s the nature of the term, malarkey. It is a folksy term, more often reserved to stand-up comedy routines, dialogue in movies, and home-spun conversations among friends. It emerged out of an era when public crude language was not as acceptable as it seems to be today. In today’s language the idiom would be much more colorful and distasteful. I’m sure Joe Biden had to restrain himself on national television to use the more genteel word. In a whisper to the President on another occasion, it was clear that his knowledge of saltier language is intact.
Malarkey is a great word which deserves its place in American English. Again, as I have said about other tasty words, it shouldn’t be used too frequently or it will lose its flavor.
Photo Credit: Summer Ballentine
I just finished reading the “Fiction” section of last week’s New Yorker. I haven’t enjoyed reading these submissions as much over the past year or so. Too bizarre at times. The selection process seemed to be skewed in a direction which didn’t necessarily appeal to me. I read them anyway. This submission was good. The […]
The encouraging of people to express an opinion carries a risk with it. It might just be that the opinion expressed is troublesome…and may actually be counter to the very point that you are trying to make. But if you are truthful that you are really looking for diverse opinions, you are safe in opening […]
You’ve probably seen the Allstate insurance commercials which feature an excellent actor and stunt man , Dean Winters, who purports to be someone known as “Mayhem.“ I cringe as he survives crashes, explosions, roofs caving in, and any number of very effectively screened disasters. His point is that mayhem happens…even to the best of us. That […]
I usually look forward to the month of March, as (here in Southern New England) it signals the beginning of Spring. By now crocuses and daffodils are beginning to thrust their green sensors through the earth and the breezes are more of a breath than a gust. But this year is different. It is March, […]