In today’s Politics Show interview with Tony Blair, Blair came up with a pretty comprehensive excuse for not investigating a crime:
This was all to do with historical events in the past
(The Saudi Arabian arms deal corruption investigation being the cause of the question, unsurprisingly.)
So that’s ok, as long as your crime was in the past, it’s not worth investigating. That should help cut the prison population at a stroke as people start using that defence in court, “It’s ok m’lud; I did commit the crime but it was in the past.”
And your starter for ten for any pedantic chronologists reading: can you have a historical event that isn’t in the past?