ipl-logo

Legitimacy Of The System By Allowing Retrials For New Evidence

915 Words4 Pages

Double jeopardy is a defense procedure that excludes an accused or a defendant from being again on similar charges in the same case after a legal conviction or acquaintance. It has its originated from the common law and the accused person can enter the autrefois acquite or the autrefois convict. This means that the defendant had been convicted or acquitted of a similar case and cannot undergo a similar trial basing on the double jeopardy principle. Almost all European countries signed the European convention on human rights and article four of the document protects against double jeopardy. It states that no one is to be subjected to criminal proceedings under the laws of that particular state for which they had been previously acquitted or …show more content…

This has brought confidence in the justice system and fairness to the oppressed in the society.
Reasserting the Legitimacy of the System by Allowing Retrials for New Evidence
The judicial process before the reforms relied on the application of the jeopardy rule.
The legitimacy of the court had been threatened by this rule and it was frustrating when new evidence was discovered and it became impossible to try the defendant again. If the court is unable to revisit a case and new evidence is provided, it means that its lacks legitimacy. The reform, however allows for only one subsequent trial. Opening the case several times would create a conflict between the states and its institutions. [2]The state will appear as if it lacks willingness to believe in institutions it created. In addition, many trials will be an abuse to the defendant and the state will commit many resources in attempts to prosecute the defendant.
The new reforms have assisted in doing away with justice issues emanating from the use of the jeopardy rule. The reforms protect against the, risk of undergoing a wrongful conviction, lead to efficient investigation, protects participants from undergoing stress in

Show More
Related
673 Words | 3 Pages

This case also shows the effectiveness of the legal system in protecting individuals rights to not be tried or punished more than once under section 26. This is shown as the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions had urged that it would be oppressive as he already served 11 months of his sentence therefore the acquittal remained the

Read More
569 Words | 3 Pages

Issue Case name: State of Oregon vs Kenneth James Harris, October 19th, 2017 Facts of the case: In the case there were two parties, one party including the defendant, Kenneth James Harris, and the State of Oregon. The dispute is based on the state of Oregon issuing a subpoena for the witness to come to trial for the case of the defendant, however, the witness failed to do so and was unavailable. The defendant argued that the only way the witness is unavailable is if the state did everything in their power to try to get the witness to court. The only thing the state did was provide the victims recording of the 9-1-1 call from the incident. Issue: Could the State of Oregon done more to produce the witness at trial?

Read More
991 Words | 4 Pages

However, the main affect this decision has on today’s society is the way justice must be carried out in the court of law and the way a person’s rights should be protected even if they’re guilty or

Read More
688 Words | 3 Pages

1. First and foremost, in regards to the case of Brady v. Maryland (1963), prosecuting attorneys withheld information from the courts in the conviction of Brady and Boblit for first degree murder. Boblit had written a confession before the trial stating he had committed the murder on his own, but due to the prosecution withholding exculpatory evidence, Brady was also convicted of the same murder. Brady petitioned the courts and the Supreme Court Ruled in favor of Brady, stating his rights of “due process” had been violated by the state of Maryland. It is from this case that a defendant may request Brady disclosure.

Read More
1506 Words | 7 Pages

The following two cases resulted in reversals of the convictions due to lack of counsel, but after this it became evident the Court was trying to draw the line of which trials to reverse. After these two cases, “in 1947 the Court made it plain that in non-capital cases it was sticking to the flexible rule of Betts v. Brady”(Lewis 118). Betts v. Brady helped to pave

Read More
189 Words | 1 Pages

Second is to prevent the government from using the resources to convict innocent people. Double Jeopardy only protects individuals when they are being prosecuted for the same crime. In the Fifth Amendment it explains that double jeopardy is, “No person shall, be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb. Double jeopardy has been

Read More
258 Words | 2 Pages

The Double Jeopardy clause in the Fifth Amendment protects people from being tried for the same case multiple times. An example of this is if someone is being tried for murder and is found not guilty by a jury, that person cannot be tried again with a different jury until they are found guilty. In the film Double Jeopardy they set the precedence that if Libby kills her husband at the end of the movie, she couldn't be charged with murder because she had previously been tried and convicted of his death. Unfortunately the double jeopardy clause would not protect her.

Read More
246 Words | 1 Pages

All clauses are adapted to the needs of the country at the present time. Change is always necessary to explore better and newer options. The double jeopardy clause of the 5th amendment hasn’t significantly changed since the constitution was ratified, but rather the way viewed. The Supreme Court's rulings in Palko v. Connecticut,  Benton v. Maryland and Heath v. Alabama show that there has been a noticeable trend towards various interpretations of the same clause over the last hundred years.

Read More
1149 Words | 5 Pages

Under the Articles, if the first court found the accused guilty they were designated as guilty. The new Judicial branch made it so that the accused could appeal the court and receive a new hearing as many times as they would like. However, one the case got to the Supreme Court, whatever their ruling was is the final decision. This gave the people the right to a fair trial. That way, if they were innocent but deemed guilty, they could appeal and have the chance to be found innocent.

Read More
353 Words | 2 Pages

In the ted talk by Adam foss, about the prosecutor’s vision for a better justice system; the theme of the talk is about when people commit crime in the this country, that the US justice system has a prosecutor that charge people for their action they committed as being explain in the chapter (7.16) of the text book. The action the government takes to punish people with their criminal record which the government has been doing for a long now till today. The author Foss believe that reforming justice system will help to replace wrath with the chances that will change people’s lives for better than destroying them with criminal record. Another point the author is making is arguing about how to reinvent American justice systems. His opinion in

Read More
909 Words | 4 Pages

The principle in law that one is innocent until proven guilty has created much discourse. There are those who feel that the moment that one is arrested, there is reasonable belief that they committed the crime. However, there are those who feel that just as the principle states, one is, and should be taken as a victim and the outcome could be either way: guilty or not guilty. In fact, this argument is supported by the many cases of malicious prosecutions and mistaken identities.

Read More
152 Words | 1 Pages

I had a vision to enhance myself academically, professionally and personally in an English-speaking environment. I completed a Business degree in Brisbane, Australia and after successful practical and theoretical results; I have developed abilities such as lateral and critical thinking; change and relationship management. I have been fascinated by cultures for years and been traveling a lot. I love meeting new people, actively listening to their stories and that could be a reason why I have friendships from all corners around the world. I am an active community volunteer and have been representing and involved with the following three organisations: 1.

Read More
1479 Words | 6 Pages

This reflection paper will first address the advantages of using retributive justice approach in three court-cases. Second, it will discuss the disadvantages of using retributive justice approaches by analyzing the three court-cases listed above. Third, it will elaborate on ways that the system could have used restorative justice processes in the cases, as well as present potential outcomes that could have been reached if restoration justice was taken into consideration. First, during lecture three, we talked about the notion of just deserts.

Read More
117 Words | 1 Pages

Restorative Justice processes are likely to reduce criminals from repeating offenses, as numerous recidivism studies have demonstrated. Thus, it would be more than justified to employ restorative processes a response to crimes under

Read More
1035 Words | 5 Pages

Justice may sometimes be cruel and harsh, in being so, however, it is universal for each and every one of us and we defend our rights in the name of it. When certain violations of justice occur individual entities are charged with different cases for which they are called up on a trial. For everyone to get a fair trial, there are some aspects to the law that need to be respected. The likes are: the phenomena of the “due process”, questioning the credibility of the witnesses and the role of advocates' persistency when defending their clients. All of these, together with a great deal of other principals, have to be there for justice to be done to the whole society.

Read More

More about Legitimacy Of The System By Allowing Retrials For New Evidence

Related Topics

Open Document