What if the same person who murdered a woman 20 yrs ago shoots someone else, could that person be charged with murder?? y or y not?? my other quest. would be why do we have double jeopardy laws, besides b/c its in the const., why can't they be tried again for the same crime?? that does not make sense to me!!
Question about double jeopardy........??
First of all - of course a murderer can be charged for killing someone else. That's not double jeopardy. It's an entirely new crime against an entirely different person.
Double jeopardy means that you cannot be charged more than once for having committed specific acts at a specific time and place which constituted a crime. If I shoot you Thursday at 6:00, I can be tried fully and finally only one time for murder. If something goes wrong in my trial before the end, they can start again. If I lose, I can appeal a point of law. But I cannot be found Not Guilty and then arrested again for shooting you Thursday at 6:00 - even if new evidence comes to light.
The reason for Double Jeopardy laws is to promote full and final administration of justice. A case must come to an end and that must be it. Otherwise, the courts would be filled up with disputes and criminal trials that would never end. Prosecutors would rush to trial on the theory that if they lose, they can prepare better or gather more evidence and try again. And juries would have no real reason to ever come to a decision on the theory that they can just pass the job off to the jury in the next trial.
One oft-quoted example is of the woman framed for her husband's murder, found guilty and sent to jail. Upon release, she finds out her husband faked his death. She sets out to kill him believing that, since she's already been convicted of killing him, she cannot be tried for his murder again. THIS IS COMPLETELY WRONG. And NAISA below is wrong as well. Since killing her husband would happen at a different time (years later) than the crime she was convicted of, they are two separate crimes and she can be charged, tried and convicted all over again.
Reply:OK to the first part that is two crimes so they can be charged for both with out it being double jeopardyy. we have double jeopard laws to protect us, they proctor should not try someone if they don't have enough evidence to convince and if the do with out the evidence it is to bad for the victim. If some one could be tried again it would just flood our legal system and eventually people would get tired of hearing the came case against the same person they would convince even if the person was not guilty. The law is made to protect the Innocent .
Reply:They can be tried for the new murder. They can't be tried for the SAME murder more than once.
Reply:It's like this. Pretend sala killed baba, and sala went to jail for that. But baba wasn't dead. So when sala was released and saw baba kills baba goes to court again but when they look at his files he already has been punished for killing baba.
Reply:Yes because it has to be the same case again like it has to be the same case that was tried and the defendant got off and it is to prevent innocent people going to jail
Reply:Yes. Try reading. Everything will make more sense.
Reply:Double Jeopardy prevents you from prosecuting someone twice for the same crimal act. By "same criminal act," I mean the specific incident that is resulting in your prosecution. As such, if there are multiple incidents, you can get charged with the same offense for each of the seperate incidents. If I kill two people one after another, I can get charged with two counts of murder. However, if I am found not guilty of one of those counts, the State is barred from trying me again on that specific crime. In addition, they cannot charge me with a lesser crime after being found not guilty of a higher crime in the exact same criminal act. So, if I kill someone on 1/1/06, was charged and tried for capital murder, and was found not guilty, the State cannot try me again for that crime I committed on 1/1/06 and was tried for. However, if after being found not guilty, I go outside and shoot someone, I can be tried for capital murder for that criminal act.
Double Jeopardy comes into play from the Fifth Amendment. Take a look at the link below for more info on the origins and exceptions.
Reply:i can answer you first question. well first it depends was the second person shot and lived or died. if they died then they can only be charged with that murder. the only thing that will put a hinderance on that trial is the murder of the woman 20 yrs prior. the lawers might ask or bring it up again, but it still depends on if the person was murdered or not. the person would only be charged with the unsolved crime.
Reply:double jeopardy relates to crimes such as murder. it is so that you cannot be punished more than once for the same crime. such as: person 1 murders Person 2, goes to court and gets sentanced to 20 years. after 20 years, he cannot be sentanced again for murdering person 2 as he has served his sentence as appointed by a judge. if Person 1 murders someone else, it is a differnt crime and therefore not covered under Double Jeopardy.
Reply:somebody can be charged with a murder that happened 20 yrs ago if the evidence is suffiecient and if that person is linked to another murder he or she can me put on trial for two count of homicide, and if double jeapordy laws were not in effect then the government could harrass citizens by charging them with the same crime over and over again
Reply:The answer to your first question is obvious... the person murders someone else, then it is not double jeopardy. Double Jeopardy comes from the 5th amendment to the U.S. COnstitution whichroughly states that a person shall not be placed in jeopardy more than once for the first offense. This means that an actual NOT GUILTY finding at the first trial isn't actually necessary - a dismissal with prejudice works as well. Once "jeopardy attaches" (e.g. after a jury is empaneled an sworn) any errors by the Government which causes the judge to throw out the case with prejudice will result in a bar to further prosecution. Other findings short of not guilty, such as a hung jury or a dismissal without prejudice do not bar subsequent prosecution. One thing to keep in mind however is that double jeopardy only applies with regard to prosecution conducted by the same sovreign. Take for example, that Nichols fellow in the Oklahoma City Bombing (tomorrow's the 11th anniversary by the way). Tried and convicted in U.S. District for for violating federal stautes related to killing federal officers. Sentenced to life in prison. Later tried and convicted again, but this time by the state of Oklahoma for murder of those same federal officer and 46 or so others. Same transaction and occurrence, but different sovreigns. As long as there is a federal statute prohibiting the conduct that is also prohibited by the state, there is no bar from both prosecutin because the theory is that both government's have an interest in meting out their own justice.
survey research
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment