The Constitutional Right Guaranteed By Article 20 ( 2 ) Against Double Jeopardy

Clause number two is the Double Jeopardy Clause. This protects you from being prosecuted twice for the same crime after conviction or acquittal, or multiple punishments for the same crime. This does not count if one is a civil case and one is a criminal case. A person can be prosecuted by the state and the federal government if he/she has committed a crime in state and federal jurisdiction. Usually the federal side will concede to the state and not prosecute.

or public danger. No one can be put on trial again for the same crime.

or public danger. No one can be put on trial again for the same crime.

One of the fundamental principles of the Criminal Law System is the presumption of innocence until proven guilty (McSherry, 2003). By enacting punitive legislation such as the examples given above, it has been said that it is removing this Common law right from the individual (Greig, 1995). It has also been said that it creates an exception to the general principle of law that no person shall be imprisoned unless a court comprised of Judge/Jury is convinced, beyond reasonable doubt that the person committed a very serious offence. Thereby effectively allowing people to be detained without the burden of proving guilt (Keon-Cohen, 1992).

This amendment was proposed to give freedom to the people. Choosing one religion, exercising their beliefs cannot be interfered by the government or be forced to choose a certain one. Freedom of speech and press gave the ability to the citizens to say what they think without being inhibited which in turn lead to bright ideas that made the country move forward. All of which was not supported by the British Empire.

The Fifth Amendment goes into the issue of double jeopardy by saying that if someone is put on trial for a particular crime and the trial ends, that person cannot be put on trial again for the same trial and incident. Whether the person is convicted and they serve out their crime or the person is acquitted, they are legally unable to be put on trial again for the same incident for the same crime. This makes our convictions more substantial without the ability to fall back or change our

subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial

another hearing on the same case. But what if, in the case of “Double Jeopardy”, Libby finds out

This paper examines the exclusionary rule. Explains the reasons for the origin of the exclusionary rule. The paper contends that use of the exclusionary rule has enabled guilty criminals to go free and that its original intention has been so distorted that it no longer fulfills its intended function and is instead a tool for protecting the rights of criminals Not only how it came about but, the true meaning as well as the exceptions. There are also a number of cases mentioned throughout the paper that have played some role in the exclusionary.

“…nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or

Double jeopardy is the prosecution of a person for an offense for which he or she has already been prosecuted. The double jeopardy clause, which is in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, was designed to protect an individual from being subject to trials and possible convictions more then once for an alleged offense. The idea was not to give the State too much over the individual, this way no individual will be subject to embarrassment, expense, and ordeal against being tried for an alleged offense more then once. It also reduces the possibility of someone innocent being found guilty. The double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment embodies three protections to criminal

The 1999 thriller Double Jeopardy tells the story of well-off Libby, her husband Nick, and son Matty. After awaking to an undeniably incriminating incident involving a missing Nick and Libby herself covered in blood with a bloody knife, Libby finds herself falsely convicted of her husband’s murder. A plot twist reveals that Nick framed Libby and, with a new identity, stole away with their son to New Orleans. In prison, Libby learns from another inmate that due to the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, if she could find Nick, she could actually murder him and get away with it. This situation provides an entertaining and thought-provoking story, however deeper examination of the semantics in the Double Jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment

Common law also permitted the prosecution to adduce evidence that was relevant to the accused’s guilt of the offence charged,

The classical view that 'no mens rea, no crime' has long ago been eroded and several laws in India and abroad, especially regarding economic crimes and departmental penalties, have created severe punishments even where the offences have been defined to exclude mens rea. Therefore, the contention that Section 37 (1) fastens a heavy liability regardless of fault has no force in depriving the forfeiture of the character of penalty.