NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5184483/

Don't say I don't care about the people who died (well, in all honesty, I kind of don't give much a damn about that). I'm concerned about the problem with which our government is presenting us regarding the constitution: tossing away our rights. Doesn't going on trial twice technically violate his rights to not be tried twice for the same crime? :?

"The impasse in the state trial is the second time prosecutors have been denied the death penalty against Nichols, who was sentenced to life in prison in 1998 after federal jurors also could not agree on his punishment."

And then in the Constitution's Bill of Rights, Article V, it states...

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmentv

Just throwing things out into the fire.

Difference between the state court and the federal court, I guess - different charges and counts of murder.

I'm not entirely sure? I live next to Oklahoma City these days and the memorial is very emotional, but I don't know much about the details as I wasn't here then. Know a few people who lost relatives but besides that.... eh, I believe in the death penalty.

well it was for different murders from the same incident, but the jury deadlock on sentencing so he's right back where he started from, serving a life sentence while the real killers walk free(or fly the motherships in freedom)

it does have to do wtih jurisdictions and state vs federal court. sort of a technicality that works against baby killers
what a crying shame

Living so close to the effects of the bombing and among people whom it profoundly affected, I'm not at all objective on this.

I do agree, though, trying to be fair, that it seems a violation of his civil liberties.

Hmmm... I'm planning on going to law school in a few years. I want to be a defense lawyer, maybe. Maybe I should rethink that, lol.

Living so close to the effects of the bombing and among people whom it profoundly affected, I'm not at all objective on this.

I do agree, though, trying to be fair, that it seems a violation of his civil liberties.

Hmmm... I'm planning on going to law school in a few years. I want to be a defense lawyer, maybe. Maybe I should rethink that, lol.

What do ya know, I might have just given you a new defense. :P

Double jepordy does not apply to multiple crimes commited by the same action (this goes back a long time). In this particular case, Nichols was tried in federal court for violations of federal law and a concurrent proceding was was suspended pending the resolution for his criminal actions under the law of the State of Oklahoma. Note that although his actions were the same, he commited multiple crimes. He might also concievably be tried in an international court for crimes against humanity (although the US doesn't agree to their necessarily having jurisdiction). Parallel prosecution under State and Federal law for an action which is both a federal crime and also a state crime is not uncommon, although frequently one will yield to the other depnding upon the offense.

It is a crime under Federal law for a felon to buy a firearm, many states also make the same action a crime. If a felon in one of these states buys a firearm they have committed one action but committed two crimes. Further many crimes are predicated upon other crimes, for instance some drunk driver with a suspended liscense may kill a pedestrian, this is one action. But the drivers has committed many crimes, driving with a suspended liscense, driving while intoxicated, driving to endanger, vehicular manslaughter and a few others. ONE action, MANY crimes.

That's rather sick. It totally messes up the spirit, if not the letter of the double jepordy law.

*rethinks her decision to go to law school*

That's rather sick. It totally messes up the spirit, if not the letter of the double jepordy law.

*rethinks her decision to go to law school*Huh, the people who wrote the 5th amendment had no problem with it, so how can it violate the spirit of the law?

who's terry?

Living so close to the effects of the bombing and among people whom it profoundly affected, I'm not at all objective on this.

I do agree, though, trying to be fair, that it seems a violation of his civil liberties.

Hmmm... I'm planning on going to law school in a few years. I want to be a defense lawyer, maybe. Maybe I should rethink that, lol.

Yeah that rethink thing is a good idea.

I can picture you defending me.

"Your Honor, my client is innocent. Um... Well, maybe he isn't. Heck, I didn't want to be a defense lawyer. I wanted to be a LUMBERJACK!"

who's terry? Click on the link... or read this thread.

Huh, the people who wrote the 5th amendment had no problem with it, so how can it violate the spirit of the law?
The people who wrote it? Just how far back does this go? And who decided to interpret the 5th amendment in that way? The Feds wrote ie, actually (well, edited it and put it together), while the anti-Feds passed it.

Living so close to the effects of the bombing and among people whom it profoundly affected, I'm not at all objective on this.

I do agree, though, trying to be fair, that it seems a violation of his civil liberties.

Hmmm... I'm planning on going to law school in a few years. I want to be a defense lawyer, maybe. Maybe I should rethink that, lol.

Yeah that rethink thing is a good idea.

I can picture you defending me.

"Your Honor, my client is innocent. Um... Well, maybe he isn't. Heck, I didn't want to be a defense lawyer. I wanted to be a LUMBERJACK!"

I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay! I sleep all night and I work all day! I cut down trees, I skip and jump, I like to press wildflowers! I put on women's clothing and hang around in bars!

*Monty Python reference*

Yeah that rethink thing is a good idea.

I can picture you defending me.

"Your Honor, my client is innocent. Um... Well, maybe he isn't. Heck, I didn't want to be a defense lawyer. I wanted to be a LUMBERJACK!" *smirks* What, are you planning to commit a crime? :lol:

Well, I can't really, I'm in college and too far along my major to change now. I'll muddle through somehow and probably not end up being a lawyer at all.

Huh, the people who wrote the 5th amendment had no problem with it, so how can it violate the spirit of the law?
The people who wrote it? Just how far back does this go? And who decided to interpret the 5th amendment in that way? The Feds wrote ie, actually (well, edited it and put it together), while the anti-Feds passed it.Madison wrote the original version of the fifth and some anonymous committee in the Senate wrote the form which passsed. The first incident I know of where one series of actions was considered to be both federal and state crimes was in 1794 with the Whiskey Rebellion in Pennsylvania. The first case to come to trial was arround 1820 and involved a militia officer, also in Pennsylvania - you have to find a lawyer for that one Look to the Federalist papers no 27 for the opinions of those who wrote the 5th amendment and multiple jusrisdictions.