Casey Is NOT Safe From Double Jeopardy Laws?

Discussion in 'Caylee Anthony 2 years old' started by darnudes, Jul 15, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Etiana

    Etiana Truth fears nothing but concealment

    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Indeed this is the question that was asked over and over again in a hundred different ways on the Lawyers thread and the answer was always the same. It's over, really, really over. Even if she confessed and wrote a book about it she can't be tried again for the same crime.
     


  2. Tulessa

    Tulessa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    23,037
    Likes Received:
    3,352
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But if it were changed now, would it apply to ICA?
     
  3. magnolia

    magnolia War Eagle

    Messages:
    82,884
    Likes Received:
    800
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The verdict is a hard pill to swallow. I take solace in the fact that she will never live a normal life. I won't waste my time and energy hating Casey Anthony. She is not worth it.
     
  4. DIXIECAT

    DIXIECAT New Member

    Messages:
    168
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Totally UNconstitutional.
    :woohoo:
     
  5. Cracka*Jaxx

    Cracka*Jaxx Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,056
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    63
    In 2008, at age 70, he was found dead in his home apparently from a fall.
     
  6. natsound

    natsound Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,100
    Likes Received:
    1,742
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually, she lied to FBI agent Nick Savage, and it's on tape. I bet they could dig up more instances of federal crimes at the hands of KC, if they really wanted to.
     
  7. natsound

    natsound Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,100
    Likes Received:
    1,742
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree with every point you make here.
     
  8. denjet

    denjet New Member

    Messages:
    919
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I totally agree ... the problem with this case was NOT the case the prosecution argued at all ... as we all know it was the jury and deliberation process that failed miserably

    I would like to see new jury laws ... ones being proposed to prevent jurors from profiting is a step in the right direction for stealth jurors ... IMO we need to revamp jury selection for high profile cases for one thing

    But IMO there needs to be more education of the jurors prior to trials ... maybe a day or two going over the charges and the laws governing them ... then requiring a test of comprehension ? Something has to be done, most of these jurors didn't even understand the instructions they were given

    Also, there needs to be checks along the way during trial to insure that jurors are not "deciding" the case before it's conclusion by talking among each other ... I've been wondering how closely they were monitored during breaks and times when they were removed from the courtroom ... It seems to me they weren't watched closely at all and discussed the case as it went along ...

    IMO jury deliberations should be video taped and videos sealed ... the state should have the same rights as the defense when it comes to stealth jurors, juror misconduct, or juror tampering ... not sure how that would be implemented without opening a can of worms but certainly something like a grand jury or panel of judges could decide if there's enough evidence for it to be heard by a higher court ... I dunno ... but something has to be done

    This case has set a very bad precedence for how to get away with capital crimes ...

    <end rant>
    :twocents:
     
  9. RR0004

    RR0004 New Member

    Messages:
    20,001
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    obstruction?
     
  10. manatee

    manatee New Member

    Messages:
    1,699
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    amazing! karma always finds a way. Looks like he died a slow death too...I googled it
     
  11. RR0004

    RR0004 New Member

    Messages:
    20,001
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In a way, I agree with you. But I have read about other cases when the federal government has stepped in...so I'm not yet 100% sure that can't happen. Not saying it will happen...but can't say it's an impossibility. The Federal gov't often steps in (think Mafia) when the State can't get a conviction. Are they trying to trample on the rights of the crime families? Maybe...think they may believe it's for the "greater good". Who knows what the federal gov't would think worthy of pursuing. They seem to be spending a whole lot of effort of late going after a baseball pitcher who allegedly lied to them about steroid use. Big whoop. JMHO
    PS- and I personally know of a case where the State couldn't prove the guy's involvement in a murder (former cop, no less). Later, the Feds went after him for insurance and mail fraud (a federal offense). You just never know how badly they may want someone to be held accountable for wrongdoing.
     
  12. manatee

    manatee New Member

    Messages:
    1,699
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I really hope so! they sure wasted resources based on her lies. I also hope the IRS comes after her as well. they are relentless.
     
  13. RR0004

    RR0004 New Member

    Messages:
    20,001
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow! Just wow!
     
  14. RR0004

    RR0004 New Member

    Messages:
    20,001
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ...but I would think it would have to be brought to their attention by the State. Heck, I've even thought about bringing it to their attention!!
     
  15. little_miss_smart

    little_miss_smart New Member

    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We have a case in the UK. A young boy call Steven Lawrence was murdered in 1993, he was 19. There were a group of 5 youths all suspected of murdering him. 3 of the 5 suspects were acquitted at trial. But due to FRESH and VIABLE evidence they can be tried again. Even though the crime was committed before the double jeopardy laws changed. It has always been well known that these youths murdered Stephen, why should they get away with murder if there is new evidence not available at the time of the investigation. Forensics are advancing all the time.

    Not every case could or should be retried, only cases where there is FRESH, VIABLE evidence.
     
  16. little_miss_smart

    little_miss_smart New Member

    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Another 2 cases snipped from Wikipedia

    On 11 September 2006, William Dunlop became the first person to be convicted of murder after previously being acquitted. Twice he was tried for the murder of Julie Hogg in Billingham in 1989, but two juries failed to reach a verdict and he was formally acquitted in 1991. Some years later, he confessed to the crime, and was convicted of perjury. The case was re-investigated in early 2005, when the new law came into effect, and his case was referred to the Court of Appeal in November 2005 for permission for a new trial, which was granted. Dunlop pleaded guilty to murdering Julie Hogg and raping her dead body repeatedly, and was sentenced to life imprisonment, with a recommendation he serve no less than 17 years.


    On 13 December 2010, Mark Weston became the first person to be convicted of murder after previously being found not guilty of the same offence, that of the murder of Vikki Thompson at Ascott-under-Wychwood on 12 August 1995. Weston's first trial was in 1996, when the jury found him not guilty. Following the discovery of compelling new evidence in 2009 – Thompson's blood on Weston's boots – Weston was arrested in 2009 and tried for a second time in December 2010, when he was found guilty of Thompson's murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment to serve a minimum of 13 years.[25]
     
  17. eileenhawkeye

    eileenhawkeye Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,763
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I agree with you that a case should only be retried again if LE finds "fresh, viable evidence" such as DNA or a confession. I also think that the DA should be required to get permission from the Supreme Court of the state they are in, before they can go for a second trial. Hypothetically, if double jeopardy was allowed in the US right now, I don't think Casey's case would qualify for a second trial.
     
  18. little_miss_smart

    little_miss_smart New Member

    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think Casey's case would qualify for a second trial at this stage. All the evidence they had was made available at the time of the trial, some was not allowed in court, like the video of Casey hyperventilating. I am not sure if that could be used again in a double jeopardy case because it was already available at the time of the first trial. It would only be new evidence or a confession. So Casey would probably never be retried because I don't think they could discover new evidence now and she will never confess. IMO
     
  19. defense101

    defense101 New Member

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The only thing I heard KC say on that tape that could be construed as a lie is as a mother I feel she is alive, then they waited for JB to show up.
     
  20. natsound

    natsound Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,100
    Likes Received:
    1,742
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That was a lie. She knew Caylee was dead.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice