Double Jeopardy

[peanuts]

U.S. Constitution: Fifth Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

What the bold type means is that say i killed someone, after i have been tried by a jury and found innocent, i may go on the streets and shout that i killed that person. I cannot be tried for the same crime twice. Personally i think this law should be repealed, and instead it should be, unless a great amount of new evidence is found then the person cannot be tried for the same crime.
Discuss.

~peanuts

 

[Ronaldotjuh]

Good point, nice found. I think this is a bit weird in the Fifth Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution.

I agree with ya

 

[peanuts]

I think immideate ratification is nessasary

 

[ImAFool]

What the bold type means is that say i killed someone, after i have been tried by a jury and found innocent, i may go on the streets and shout that i killed that person. I cannot be tried for the same crime twice. Personally i think this law should be repealed, and instead it should be, unless a great amount of new evidence is found then the person cannot be tried for the same crime.
Discuss.

~peanuts

To some, "great evidence" is opinionated, whereas the government should never be opinionated.

 

[Clashfan]

The State shouldn't prosecute someone until they've gathered all the evidence they can. No one who's been acquitted should live in fear that the government will go after them again.

 

[Eric]

What the bold type means is that say i killed someone, after i have been tried by a jury and found innocent, i may go on the streets and shout that i killed that person. I cannot be tried for the same crime twice. Personally i think this law should be repealed, and instead it should be, unless a great amount of new evidence is found then the person cannot be tried for the same crime.
Discuss.

~peanuts

You want it repealed until your are wrongly convicted of murder and found innocent the first time. This constitutional right does the following:

Prevents courts from over ruling cases which have already been the subject of a final judgment.
Prevents harassment/oppression from the courts.


I see what you're trying to say but when there isn't enough evidence for a sure conviction in the first trial prosecutors are urged not to prosecute until more evidence is found.

 

[jebckr]

I think immideate ratification is nessasary

Slow down George. Ha, anyways I think it is an outdated ammendment, but it won't be changed any time soon.