Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: I think they are just talking mistrial or limiting punishment to death penalty.
No one has said jeorpady has been attached yet. Legal scholars please explain when jeopardy gets attached and doesn't when a trial has already begun but not concluded.
|
By saying something is "in jeopardy" it means there is a chance that a desired outcome may not be reached, it's not a legal term. In this case, because of government incompetence the shitbag defendant could go free or get a life sentence and not get put to death (the desired outcome). Hope that clears things up. MJD
|
thanks, I am no legal scholar so I am probably wrong on the terms.
Perhaps you can clear this up. Is it true that once a trial proceeds past some point and it cannot be continued, the person cannot be tried again because of rules against double jeopardy. However it the trial is stopped before some point, then it is just stopped and the prosecutor can decide to retry the case if he wishes. If this is true, what is that point in the trial?
|
Here's a quick run-down of double jeopardy: The trial opens, opening statements are given, testimony and evidence is presented, but then there is a problem (misconduct, witness tampering, etc.) and the case is dismissed. Defendant goes free. If the prosecution wants, they can re-file the charges, but any evidence and testimony already presented in the first case cannot be reused in the second trial. If there is other evidence that was not introduced, it can be used. I may have over-simplified but this should help out some. MJD