Let's just say that while on trial, the defendent's been accused of a murder and there is little to no evidence to prove that he committed the crime. Jury finds him not-guilty and he is now free. Sometime after the trial the police find new evidence linking him to the murder which he has been proven in court to be not-guilty for. Can he be re-arrested and brought back to trial for a crime in which he was found to be innocent if new evidence is discovered later?
2007-12-04 04:20:21 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
No, the fifth amendment to the US constitution says you can't be tried twice for the same crime. OJ Simpson could make a public comment that he did kill his wife, and there's nothing the state could do about it. However, you can be charged with another crime, say instead of murder, manslaughter. Or the federal gov't could step in and charge another crime, like civil rights violation (for taking a life). So there is a way around it.
That's why people are sometimes released without being charged. The state knows once they arrest and charge someone the clock starts and they have to have a case ready. By not charging them, it allows them to build the case but the expense is the def't is free.
2007-12-04 05:47:25 · answer #1 · answered by JR 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well Double Jeopardy would seem to apply here. You're talking about being tried for the same crime after one trial has gone all the way to the jury. There might be a chance if the new evidence also pointed to a distinctly different element of the crime. For instance, if the murder took place as part of a robbery. The accused was found not guilty of the murder, but was never charged with the robbery because the police didn't know the motive. Now they find evidence of the robbery and realize that is what led to the murder. They cannot re-try the person for murder, but they may be able to bring robbery charges.
2007-12-04 04:35:28 · answer #2 · answered by Adom 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No ... that would constitute what is called "double jeopardy," and it is not allowed in the US legal system. That is why when the Attorney General's Office files charges against someone they want to make sure they have a case, because if they lose they can never bring those charges against them again for that particular offense (even if later it become obvious they did do it, and they even admit "I did it."). You can only be tried once in a specific court for a specific offense ...
If you're in doubt I have two letters for you ... O.J.
2007-12-04 04:29:59 · answer #3 · answered by blursd2 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, not in the same court, it would be 'Double Jeopardy'. There have been instances where the defendant has been tried in Federal Court after an acquittal in a State Court but it is a rarely used tactic.
2007-12-04 04:29:21 · answer #4 · answered by Bladerunner 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
pretend perception structures (aka faith) can wreck a infant's existence. practise a infant a twisted and distorted way of seeing the international, on condition that this brings happiness, is irresponsible and unsafe to an incalculable volume. In different words, this is a huge gamble. it would want to no longer have a huge result, even though it would want to have very reliable, risky consequences. A pretend perception device, even as embraced wholeheartedly as "the fact," contained in the face of plentiful data on the opposite, finally ends up in a dissociation from fact and from a lifelike information of how issues paintings. ..
2016-10-25 10:42:29 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, it's double indemnity. You cannot be tried for the same crime twice, regardless of the evidence.
2007-12-04 04:52:40 · answer #6 · answered by Sharon M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes its the prerogative of the court if it comes to know of it even if nobody has filed a complaint.
see .. Exceptions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_jeopardy
2007-12-04 04:25:26 · answer #7 · answered by anewbrainstorm 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. That's double jeapardy. 2D
2007-12-04 04:32:26 · answer #8 · answered by 2D 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋