2007-03-22 15:02:27 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
It's a good principle, because it prevents repeated prosecution which is too easy to abuse and become harassment.
In practice, some of the specific rules don't seem the best way to define the limits of the practice.
2007-03-22 15:05:56 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I will find out in a few days. I received a SIS and now the prosecutor thinks my lawyer did something crooked to get it. I dont get it they agreed before the judge now the prosecutor wants this and that. Do I have to Give them crap since the judge has already set the punishment
2007-03-22 17:10:51 · answer #2 · answered by confused 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. Addressing an alleged wrong of prosecutors abusing their position with another wrong of letting innocent and guilty acquitted people walk free hardly makes a right.
Leave it to a Grand Jury to decide if a person should stand trial again. If he is actually innocent what new evidence could there be that is going to make them commit for retrial? Caught on tape? A confession?
If he is actually guilty, then who cares
2007-03-22 15:53:59 · answer #3 · answered by Edward Carson 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well I do not otherwise the Judaical system would control everything. Corruption would allow prosecutors the ruin any person and black mail would control politicians. Well the argument is bunk because of the bill or rights.
2007-03-22 15:14:27 · answer #4 · answered by yeoldguineapig 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes. I'll take potent potables for $200, Alex.
2007-03-22 15:12:25 · answer #5 · answered by normobrian 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It isn't fair to the people who have less points because they have less to gamble with.
2007-03-22 15:07:34 · answer #6 · answered by dukes_blue 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋