Comment by moralestapia
2 years ago
prosecute: to officially accuse someone of committing an illegal act, and to bring a case against that person in a court of law
Source: Cambridge's dictionary (but any other would work as well)
2 years ago
prosecute: to officially accuse someone of committing an illegal act, and to bring a case against that person in a court of law
Source: Cambridge's dictionary (but any other would work as well)
> From Cambridge's (or any other) dictionary
Where did you get this? I'm seeing "to officially accuse someone of committing a crime" [1]. Criminality is esssential to the term. (EDIT: Found it. Cambridge Academic Content dictionary. It seems to be a simplified text [2]. I'm surprised they summarised the legal definition that way versus going for the colloquial one.)
You have to go back to the 18th century to find the term used to refer to initiating any legal action [3][4].
[1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/prosecut...
[2] https://www.cambridge.org/us/cambridgeenglish/catalog/dictio...
[3] https://verejnazaloba.cz/en/more-about-public-prosecution/hi...
[4] https://www.etymonline.com/word/prosecute
Scroll down on that site, literally. Words have more that one meaning.
Here's what I get from MacOS's dictionary: institute legal proceedings against (a person or organization).
I can also be pedantic and insist that, even under the strict interpretation you are vouching for ...
>Looking/sounding like somebody else (even if its famous) is not prosecutable.
... is a correct argument.
If this is really your hill to die on, go for it. Using “prosecute” to refer to civil litigation is not standard English in any dialect circa 1850.
4 replies →
I think it’s still common informal usage to prosecute a (moral) case. Maybe more common in the UK where you can bring a literal private prosecution.
Although I think what lawyers say these days is that it’s not colorable.
> it’s still common informal usage to prosecute a (moral) case
Sure, those are other definitions [1], e.g. to prosecute an argument. Within a legal context, however, it is black and white.
> in the UK where you can bring a literal private prosecution
For crimes. One wouldn't say one is prosecuting a defendant for e.g. libel. (Some states have private prosecution [2].)
[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prosecute
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_prosecution#United_Sta...
4 replies →
Why would that make it more common in the UK? Being able to bring a private prosecution strengthens the distinction, a regular citizen can both sue someone for a civil offense and prosecute someone for a criminal offense. It makes it more clearly nonsense to refer to suing someone for slandering you as "prosecuting" them because you can bring prosecutions and that is not one!
1 reply →
Go away with the “well, actually”.
It’s a civil dispute.
The term "prosecution" applies to civil cases as well as criminal ones.