Should the prosecution get unlimited chances when mistrials are declared?

Should the prosecution get unlimited chances when mistrials are declared?

If a defendant is acquitted, found outright "not guilty", it's done. Due to the rules of double-jeopardy they cannot be tried again for the same crime.

But, if a conviction is not obtained and there's a hung jury/mistrial, the prosecution can come back again... and again... and again... and again, if need be, as many times as they want. No double-jeopardy.

Is this unlimited potential just? Or, should there be some kind of limit to number of tries?

radcen said:

Should the prosecution get unlimited chances when mistrials are declared?

If a defendant is acquitted, found outright "not guilty", it's done. Due to the rules of double-jeopardy they cannot be tried again for the same crime.

But, if a conviction is not obtained and there's a hung jury/mistrial, the prosecution can come back again... and again... and again... and again, if need be, as many times as they want. No double-jeopardy.

Is this unlimited potential just? Or, should there be some kind of limit to number of tries?

Click to expand...

No, leaving a person's life in limbo indefinitely is wrong.
Continuously having to spend their personal moneys on defending themselves, will eventually fail and they may be convicted by poverty.

radcen said:

Should the prosecution get unlimited chances when mistrials are declared?

If a defendant is acquitted, found outright "not guilty", it's done. Due to the rules of double-jeopardy they cannot be tried again for the same crime.

But, if a conviction is not obtained and there's a hung jury/mistrial, the prosecution can come back again... and again... and again... and again, if need be, as many times as they want. No double-jeopardy.

Is this unlimited potential just? Or, should there be some kind of limit to number of tries?

Click to expand...

Depends on the reason for mistrial.

If it is due to jury misconduct and the prosecution has a solid case I say retry.

If the prosecution and judge can't get a trial done properly with the second try I'd say they're S.O.L. I'd give em three tries, but if they go for a third and another mistrial happens then they get fired for incompetence. Only exception to this (the firing) is if it was someone on the Jury that caused the mistrial. I'd also limit the type of things that they can call a mistrial for. For example, they should not be able to call for a mistrial just because someone on the jury talked about Jury Nullification. That kinda crap has to stop since it is an inherent Right with Jury Trials.

radcen said:

Should the prosecution get unlimited chances when mistrials are declared?

If a defendant is acquitted, found outright "not guilty", it's done. Due to the rules of double-jeopardy they cannot be tried again for the same crime.

But, if a conviction is not obtained and there's a hung jury/mistrial, the prosecution can come back again... and again... and again... and again, if need be, as many times as they want. No double-jeopardy.

Is this unlimited potential just? Or, should there be some kind of limit to number of tries?

Click to expand...

Well, you are only legally "not guilty" if a judge or jury says so. Otherwise you are still a suspect in a crime. Understand there are two ways a defendant's case can remain unsettled. Dismissal and mistrial.

There are lots of reasons why either a mistrial or a dismissal can occur. One of the worst situations is when evidence which was improperly obtained get's thrown out as fruit of a poisoned tree. The person is guilty as hell, but because someone in the chain of evidence effed-up and the prosecutor can't get the conviction. Another is if a key witness dies, or refuses to testify. The prosecution may petition for the case to be dismissed without prejudice, meaning the case can be refiled if good evidence is ever recovered.

Mistrials typically occur when there is some uncorrectable error in the proceeding. This includes jury tampering, attorney misconduct, judicial misconduct, perjury, etc.

Still, it is a rare situation when there is more than one subsequent trial. Typically, no trial follows unless the Prosecutor feels he can win the case. So a suspect has to live in a limbo state, not knowing if he will have to face trial again.

What prompted this question anyway? Do you have a particular case in mind as an example of multiple mistrials?

radcen said:

Should the prosecution get unlimited chances when mistrials are declared?

If a defendant is acquitted, found outright "not guilty", it's done. Due to the rules of double-jeopardy they cannot be tried again for the same crime.

But, if a conviction is not obtained and there's a hung jury/mistrial, the prosecution can come back again... and again... and again... and again, if need be, as many times as they want. No double-jeopardy.

Is this unlimited potential just? Or, should there be some kind of limit to number of tries?

Click to expand...

We have had this discussion before I believe.

Until the case is resolved, meaning guilt or innocence is established, then there should not be a limit to the number of tries. That said, there is a practical limit to trying a case over and over again the same way. You would assume that a mistrial would be from some error, but a hung jury would suggest something is really wrong with the case. If the prosecution does not change tactics and/or how evidence is presented then there is always that chance of causing another jury indecision. To dispose of the case would mean something has to give.

I would question how often this is really happening, where the prosecution is bringing a case that resulted in hung jury or mistrial two, three, or more times. Do we have lots of examples of this happening?

I think the people have spoken and unless there is proof of something illegal being done by a jury member or the then no new trial unless new evidence is discovered. If no one is charged with obstructing justice then there is no mistrial.

Using the unlimited money and resources of government to impoverish and finally get a favorable verdict for the prosecution is not justice but tyranny.

I think the courts do a very good job with sentencing overall. We all know that there are some judges who get out of line, but they are usually exposed in time.

radcen said:

Should the prosecution get unlimited chances when mistrials are declared?

If a defendant is acquitted, found outright "not guilty", it's done. Due to the rules of double-jeopardy they cannot be tried again for the same crime.

But, if a conviction is not obtained and there's a hung jury/mistrial, the prosecution can come back again... and again... and again... and again, if need be, as many times as they want. No double-jeopardy.

Is this unlimited potential just? Or, should there be some kind of limit to number of tries?

Click to expand...

A mistrial can happen. If it does, the defendant should get significant recompensation and the culpable party should be punished. There should be the possibility of retail. One retail only. If that fails not guilty should follow.