To: Bratch
Illinois high court ruled that rigid, mechanical rules should not determine whether the Double Jeopardy Clause is violated WOW! Just damn. I can't fathom how someone, an "educated" person of the law, would just spout something like that as acceptable practice. Liberal truly don't care about the Constitution or this nation's laws unless they suit their needs.
3 posted on
05/29/2014 8:12:36 AM PDT by
rarestia
(It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
To: rarestia
I think the Illinois court had a point: 'The court held that since the state was not participating in the case, Martinez was never at risk of conviction. Thus Martinez was never in jeopardy the first time and so would not suffer double jeopardy by a new trial.'
6 posted on
05/29/2014 8:15:24 AM PDT by
ConservingFreedom
(A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
To: rarestia
Illinois high court ruled that rigid, mechanical rules should not determine whether the Double Jeopardy Clause is violated. that stood out to me too! rigid, mechanical rules are exactly what should determine whether the Double Jeopardy Clause is violated or not... can you imagine? sheesh!
24 posted on
05/29/2014 9:04:33 AM PDT by
latina4dubya
(when i have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson