[Jim W N]

He was already officially punished for his crime. Just because the outcome of the punishment didn’t turn out the way the officials desired is irrelevant. Punishing him again IS double jeopardy.

[Genoa]

Nope, the punishment was death. It wasn’t done until it was done. If they couldn’t find a vein, they should have found a rifle or a rope.

[Steely Tom]

He was already officially punished for his crime. Just because the outcome of the punishment didn’t turn out the way the officials desired is irrelevant. Punishing him again IS double jeopardy.

Agree.

[treetopsandroofs]

“He was already officially punished for his crime. Just because the outcome of the punishment didn’t turn out the way the officials desired is irrelevant. Punishing him again IS double jeopardy.”

Even Snopes disagrees with you.

http://www.snopes.com/legal/second.asp

[Yogafist]

So is keeping him in jail double jeopardy? His penalty was death, and they tried but couldn’t accomplish it.

[Lurker]

Bullcrap

[stremba]

Incorrect. Double jeopardy is a legal term with a very specific meaning that has nothing to do with punishment. It is only the prohibition against trying an accused person more than once. (Retrials following the declaration of a mistrial don’t violate double jeopardy because in such cases a trial has not been completed; this includes mistrials due to a hung jury).

[Crucial]

A few needle pricks constitutes punisment for murder? Nice try.