politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Can they just file a new set of charges and hope for a different Judge?
No; double jeopardy.
If they are different charges it’s not double jeopardy. Double jeopardy means being tried twice for the same crime and same charge.
I had, perhaps incorrectly, taken OCs comment to mean filing the same charges again, looking for a second trial that actually proceeds while the first is endlessly delayed.
Totally separate charges would indeed be a separate matter.
Your comment has one upvote and two downvotes currently. It would be nice if someone would explain why they think you're wrong if that's why they're downvoting. As IANAL, I have no actual idea how this works.
Double jeopardy is for the same crime, not more of the same crime. The charges for the additional documents found after the first round would be a separate charge. You know, like murdering two people is two separate charges.
My down vote is because saying additonal crimes would be double jeopardy is stupid enough that I assume the poster is a MAGA shill, but don't want to spend the time checking. You seemed curious and worth a reply.
Thanks for the explanation.
Well that's overly hostile for no good reason... Assuming the worst of everyone you encounter is a pretty terrible way to live and just makes the world a shitier place to be.
My response was in relation to filing the same charges again; as in attempting to have two trials for the same charges/crimes, hoping one goes well while the other is hopelessly delayed by a shitty judge. A misunderstanding perhaps. One you could have cleared up...
/edit; and now your downvoting every comment I've made. Glad we could have a reasonable discussion. Enjoy your pointless hatred, Pce.
I only down voted two of your posts before this one. Apparently other people also think your posts are terrible and don't add anything to the discussion.
That would certainly be nice. Kinda just tossed the idea out there tho; IANAL as well.
I'm just familiar with the general concept, but looking closer at the details; it seems that may only apply after an actual acquittal/conviction.
You could probably run two simultaneous trials, and only apply the double jeopardy clause once one of the two trials concludes (nullifing/halting the later trial), but I'm not all that sure.
No idea if any case law actually supports this idea.
No, committing two murders doesn't mean one invalidates the other. Finding more documents warrants additional charges.
We aren't talking about seprate crimes, ~~or additional charges~~; we're discussing starting a second trial for the same set of ~~charges~~ crimes, while the first trial is still proceeding/on hold.
Yes, we ARE talking about a new and separate set of charges for the ADDITIONAL documents.