Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (73930)	9/4/2003 10:43:14 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Double jeopardy won't apply because there hasn't been a trial. Dismissing a case and bringing it again in another venue or jurisdiction is nothing worse than forum shopping, at worst. As for the failure to comply with the trial judge's rulings about discovery, that's what happens when a case is dismissed, all the orders regarding discovery go away. I do stuff like that all the time with civil cases, because Virginia allows something called "nonsuit." Well, not "all the time" but enough that I feel comfortable with the law of nonsuit and other discontinuances. I have to admit that I am not really impressed with the delay by the administration in seeking this procedural advantage, but if they have an absolute right to it (and I think they do) then one can't fault them for taking every procedural advantage they have available to them. Indeed, one would have to fault them for failure to take advantage of available favorable procedures.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (73930)	9/4/2003 11:20:47 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I don't know about the Compulsory Process Clause. What is tht referring to? As to Double Jeopardy, you aren't put in jeopardy until a jury is empaneled, so if the judge dismisses the case before a jury is sworn in, the can't be double jeopardy because there hasn't yet been initial jeopardy. Plus, to the dismay of many civil libertarians (including me) the Supreme Court, in another one of those hard facts make bad law cases, has ruled that being tried and acquitted in a state court and then being tried in a federal court isn't double jeopardy because although they might be for the same set of facts and events, it's not the same court, and it's not exactly the same offense. Don't ask me to explain that decision, I only report it. but that's the way it is. Presumably this SC would say the same about federal court and military tribunal even if Moussaoui had already been put into jeopardy and acquitted in federal court.