Posted on 07/12/2011 4:09:56 PM PDT by walsh
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- Casey Anthony was acquitted last week in state court of killing her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee.
Now, a new website, change.org, is petitioning to have Anthony tried for the same crimes, but this time in federal court. It's called the dual sovereignty rule.
"The double jeopardy clause has been interpreted to allow two prosecutions as long as they're by different sovereigns," said B.J. Priester, a professor at Florida Coastal School of Law.
(Excerpt) Read more at news4jax.com ...
Oh, probably, if she made the claim directly to the FBI. Not exactly a crime that will get you life in prison, though.
That's for a civil cause of action. The criminal code is 18 US Code, Section 241 or 242.
I would never convict someone for lying to a cop, nor to Congress. Government officials lie all the time in Congressional hearing and none of them ever get prosecuted. Roger Clemons was stupid to even testify at a Congressional hearing. Should have just said he didn’t want to bother with the expense of an attorney or take the time to do it.
Never talk to the cops or anyone else who could possibly cost you your money, property or liberty.
Exactly. Americans ought to hold the prohibition against double jeopardy sacred. The sad thing is that so few real Americans remain (hint to Kos/DU lurkers: "real Americans" is about values, not skin color).
No. They would have to charge her with a federal crime.
If she had been taken across state lines then possibly.
But here there is no chance.
The officers in the Rodney King beating were acquitted on state charges, then tried in federal court for violating King’s civil rights.
The Feds don’t just have parallel laws as a back up in the event a defendant gets away with one in state court.
Casey Anthony has it coming, but it won’t be in federal court.
I’m thinking a higher authority will deal with her.
OJ was found not guilty based on the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
That doesn’t mean the jury found him innocent. There is a big freaking difference. As a defense attorney I highlight this all the time.
There is nothing wrong with pursuing him under the lesser standard of proof beyond a preponderance of the evidence.
Plus it doesn’t put the Constitution in play by doing this.
“I’m sorry, if you are looking to put someone to death, you need more than 80%. That would imply that 20% of those executed were innocent...
That’s not acceptable.”
8/10 is good enough for me. Those who wait on 100% certainly are waiting on something that isn’t happening, and less than perfect is all we have.
You say the same thing on every Casey Anthony thread.
Give it a rest.
OK
Well it takes 12/12ths to convict or acquit someone. That doesn’t square with your 80%.
There are so many federal laws that I would bet they could find some that she broke and could have her tried in federal court. Not likely to happen but I do want the LEO to keep investigating and they might find evindece to charge Casey with other crimes or evidence that someone else played a part. I do not think this case should go a a dusty firl drawer.
There’s also the (at least?) two civil lawsuits by “Zanny” and Texas Equusearch. Will anything come of those?
Murder is not a federal crime...they can probably stretch it, and charge her with “violating the daughter’s civil rights,” but it is a...that’s be honest...a white person...so.
Secondly, I sincerely doubt that the US Attorney down there in Florida was/is biting his nails to correct this injustice. Basically, the defense is going to argue that a state court found her not guilty, why should she be guilty now? And can you imagine the jury selection for this too?
Of course, someone can also bring a wrongful death lawsuit against her, but that is civil, so she won’t be doing any time.
I may be way off, but I believe that when a case involves a child, and a potential kidnapping (think of the nanny Casey said had her child) the FBI automatically gets involved.
They actually have to prove that the daughter was kidnapped. And the penalty for kidnapping isn’t servere, as it is, say for, murder.
Any kidnapping case is federal...but it doesn’t necessarily have to involve children.
Additionally, the feds only get involved when state lines have been crossed.
The Lindbergh Act is a federal law (48 Stat. 781) that makes it a crime to kidnap—for ransom, reward, or otherwise—and transport a victim from one state to another or to a foreign country, except in the case of a minor abducted by his or her parent.
The Lindbergh law provides that if the victim is not released within twenty-four hours after being kidnapped, there is a rebuttable presumption that he or she has been transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
The punishment for violation of the Lindbergh Act is imprisonment for a term of years or for life.
Yea that is true!
Of course you would say that there is "nothing wrong," you're a lawyer.
But your deciding about reasonable doubts and preponderances of evidence comes after the Supreme Law of the Land at best. The fact is that the intent of the double jeopardy clause in the Fifth Amendment was to prevent a man from having to twice answer charges for any crime associated with one set of facts. Virtually every felony causes damages that might be claimed. I doubt very much that you could cite a case heard while the Framers were still cogent where someone who was acquitted of a crime was nevertheless required to answer for damages caused by that crime.
ML/NJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.