The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Sat Nov 23, 2024 6:18 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:22 pm
Posts: 5716
Khross wrote:
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
See the practical problem with what you are suggesting?
I don't think there's a practical problem in that case. I do, however, find practical problems with how law is practiced legislatively and judicially in the the United States. I imagine, were we required to hold a separate for each charge, our prosecution system would find itself prioritizing crimes, evidence gathering, and arguments. Instead, we end up in a situation where they disperse their resources going for as many charges as possible: it's a lawn dart approach. Likewise, since I am a big proponent of equality in judicial action, I think this might actually lead to a more equitable and just system.


I'm with you on the animosity to the lawn dart approach. However, I seriously disagree with preventing trial "lumping".


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:32 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Khross wrote:
Arathain:

No, I'm just arguing that by virtue of grouping all the charges into a single trial, that retrying because of a mis-trial doesn't really seem kosher to me. If the jury got hung, then it's an issue of not passing reasonable doubt. I know how things work, I just honestly don't think there's an exclusion that exists or should exist to allow a second trial in this case.


The only reason all the charges are tried at once is efficiency. You really could try each and every charge with its own trial. That in no way puts anyone in double jeopardy.

In any case, the Fifth Ammendment doesn't specify that reasonable doubt is satisfied only by a unanimous verdict. That's an additional qualification imposed over and above the Constitution. A hung jury simply fails to satisfy that additional safeguard. There doesn't need to be a clause allowing retrial in case of a hung jury; there would need to be a clause prohibiting it explicitly.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 10:47 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Actually, given that the law is nessecarily a public good, I'm all for taking the private element out the entire field.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 353 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group