Does protection against double jeapordy include new compelling evidence?

Question

If John Doe were acquitted of a murder, but later a video tape was found showing him commit that murder, is he still protected from prosecution for that crime?

Answer 1

pretty much.

Answer 2

The answer is complex. If the acquittal was final and there was no defect in the trial, double jeopardy will prohibit a new prosecution on the same charge even if there is new evidence. If, however, the original trial was found defective and the case has to be retried, there is no double jeopardy problem as the first trial was null and void from the outset due to its defect.

Also, if the murder offends both sovereigns (assuming we are int he US), i.e. is both a state and a federal crime and you are acquitted of murder only in one court (for example state court) there is no bar to the other sovereign from prosecuting (the federal government).

There is also no bar to using that evidence to prosecute for a lesser offence even if murder would be barred, it is possible to prosecute for an assault with a deadly weapon, criminal battery and so forth.

Double jeopardy also does not bar a civil suit.

So while it generally does bar retrial, it only bars retrial before the same sovereign on the same charge and even then not if the first trial is in some way invalidated.

Answer 3

in the usa yes. the state might attempt to lay a different charge but you or john doe can not be put on trail again if the first trail went right to the end and a verdict of not guilty was arrived at.
in the states they have another system though in which a person who is found not guilty by a criminal court can be found liable by a civil court . this happen to oj simpson.
he is suppose to pay the family and the children a ton of money as they found he was the cause of the loss of the mother . odd thing since the other trial he was not guilty .
i think the usa is the only place this goes on.

Answer 4

Yep.

He could be found innocent, and then stand up in a public and announce on live TV that he is the true murderer, and be protected under double jeopardy. But I am sure the DA would find something to get him for. Perjury might be a crime, if he took the stand and said he didn't do it. . .

Answer 5

Double Jeopardy would still apply. The DA should have done a better job and not rushed the case to trial before all evidence was available.

Answer 6

He is protected. If he committed murder, and was later acquitted, new evidence will not re-open the case.

Answer 7

He cannot be tried again for that crime, but if the video showed some other crime that wasn't part of the original case, he could still be prosecuted.

Answer 8

Laughter became into surely suited in giving you the prevalent to confirm if the double jeopardy clause is brought about: it particularly is, while you're convicted of two crimes and one in all them is what they call a lesser lined offense, then the state would desire to flow with one. To be clean, you're charged with Crime X, and to be convicted of X the State has to show you probably did A, B, and C. you additionally are charged with crime Y, and to be convicted of Y, the State would desire to teach you probably did A and B. nicely, because of the fact Y is a lesser lined offense of X (all of its aspects have been aspects of X), the Double Jeopardy clause would not enable them to charge you with the two. for this reason, i'd wager littering and spitting on the sidewalk are actually not lesser lined offenses of one yet another. in spite of everything, "spitting" will require the state to show you spit, while littering won't.

Answer 9

Yes. You cannot be tried twice for the same crime. Period.

Technically, they could bring a new charge against you, purgery, at best.

Answer 10

Absolutly, otherwise it defeats the purpose to consider a timeframe of any evidence.

Answer 11

yes