Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Sports Forum

Sports Forum

  1. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    14 Jul '11 16:27
    Stupid!~

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-clemens-mistrial-20110714,0,1724711.story
  2. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    16 Jul '11 07:25
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    Stupid!~

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-clemens-mistrial-20110714,0,1724711.story
    Clemens adds one more K to his resume'

    I personally believe the government wasn't happy with the jury and they punted it with
    thoughts on re-trial.
    I will laugh my butt off if Judge Walton disallows the re-trial on "double jeopardy",
    although I feel that is unlikely.
  3. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    16 Jul '11 12:42
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Clemens adds one more K to his resume'

    I personally believe the government wasn't happy with the jury and they punted it with
    thoughts on re-trial.
    I will laugh my butt off if Judge Walton disallows the re-trial on "double jeopardy",
    although I feel that is unlikely.
    "Jeopardy" usually attaches when a jury is sworn in. The prosecutors are going to have an uphill climb convincing this judge that a new trial is allowable after such an egregious violation of his pre-trial ruling.
  4. 16 Jul '11 13:26
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Clemens adds one more K to his resume'

    I personally believe the government wasn't happy with the jury and they punted it with
    thoughts on re-trial.
    I will laugh my butt off if Judge Walton disallows the re-trial on "double jeopardy",
    although I feel that is unlikely.
    There is no applicable double jeapordy in a mistrial. DJ is applicable only after a judgment has been rendered and the state wants a second go at it. Since no adjudication took place Clemens can be retried. It is unlikely it will happen, but door wide open.
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    16 Jul '11 14:03
    Originally posted by scacchipazzo
    There is no applicable double jeapordy in a mistrial. DJ is applicable only after a judgment has been rendered and the state wants a second go at it. Since no adjudication took place Clemens can be retried. It is unlikely it will happen, but door wide open.
    You know about as much about law as you do about sports (i.e. very little). It is very unclear if Clemens can be re-tried:

    Moments after he declared a mistrial on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton wondered aloud to the packed courtroom, "Now we must address whether the defendant [Clemens] can be re-prosecuted."

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Walton's conclusion that the government prosecutors were guilty of a "direct violation of my ruling" adds to the likelihood that he will rule against a second trial.

    http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/6770227/roger-clemens-mistrial-mean-former-all-star-pitcher-walks-perjury-charges
  6. 16 Jul '11 15:05 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    You know about as much about law as you do about sports (i.e. very little). It is very unclear if Clemens can be re-tried:

    Moments after he declared a mistrial on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton wondered aloud to the packed courtroom, "Now we must address whether the defendant [Clemens] can be re-prosecuted."

    ------------------ tory/_/id/6770227/roger-clemens-mistrial-mean-former-all-star-pitcher-walks-perjury-charges
    Actually I do happen to know a bit about law. I repeat. No adjudication means door wide open to retry. There is no double jeapardy without adjudication. Clemens may not be retried, but it will not be because of double jeapardy. Plain and simple.

    "Double jeopardy is a procedural defense that forbids a defendant from being tried again on the same, or similar charges following a legitimate acquittal or conviction. At common law a defendant may plead autrefois acquit or autrefois convict (a peremptory plea), meaning the defendant has been acquitted or convicted of the same offense.[1]

    If this issue is raised, evidence will be placed before the court, which will normally rule as a preliminary matter whether the plea is substantiated, and if it so finds, the projected trial will be prevented from proceeding. In many countries the guarantee against being "twice put in jeopardy" is a constitutional right; these include India, Mexico, and the United States. In other countries, the protection is afforded by statute law.[3]"

    Since Clemens was neither acquitted nor convicted there is no adjudication. The "out loud" musing of a jurist does not become case law. Judge may wonder all he wants, but door is still open.
  7. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    16 Jul '11 15:24 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by scacchipazzo
    Actually I do happen to know a bit about law. I repeat. No adjudication means door wide open to retry. There is no double jeapardy without adjudication. Clemens may not be retried, but it will not be because of double jeapardy. Plain and simple.

    "Double jeopardy is a procedural defense that forbids a defendant from being tried again on the same, or s a jurist does not become case law. Judge may wonder all he wants, but door is still open.
    I'll take a judge's "musing" over yours any time. Here's a case from a few months ago where there was no conviction or acquittal, but where prosecutor misconduct was deemed so egregious that DJ banned a retrial:

    On March 14, 2011, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors may not retry Jack Edward Earl Parker for murder after he shot and killed his sister’s boyfriend. He claimed the shooting was in self-defense. Parker’s first trial ended when the judge declared a mistrial due to prosecutorial misconduct. The prosecutor played an unredacted videotape containing graphic images of the crime scene to the jury and made several improper arguments during closing summations. The trial judge held that the prosecutor intentionally goaded defense counsel into moving for a mistrial. This type of misconduct sometimes occurs when a prosecutor believes they are losing the case. In Parker’s case, the jury came back deadlocked twice before the judge ruled on the mistrial motion. The South Carolina Supreme Court concluded that “the solicitor intended to goad the defendant into moving for a mistrial… and further prosecution [is] barred under the Double Jeopardy Clauses.”

    http://www.veritasinitiative.org/news/south-carolina-supreme-court-rules-double-jeopardy-applies-after-prosecutor-intentionally-caused-mistrial/
  8. 16 Jul '11 16:20
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    I'll take a judge's "musing" over yours any time. Here's a case from a few months ago where there was no conviction or acquittal, but where prosecutor misconduct was deemed so egregious that DJ banned a retrial:

    On March 14, 2011, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors may not retry Jack Edward Earl Parker for murder after h ...[text shortened]... supreme-court-rules-double-jeopardy-applies-after-prosecutor-intentionally-caused-mistrial/
    Banning of a re-trial does not double jeopardy make, nor does judicial musings. in Clemens' case there was no prosecutorial misconduct, just "error". I guess you fail to grasp the simple concept of "no adjudication means no double jeopardy". I don't care whether you take my comments over a judge's musings. Both you and the judge are wrong! A mistrial means there is NO ADJUDICATION! IF YOU ADJUDICATE THEN YOU CAN'T RETRY! A mistrial means there can be a new trial. Whether there is one or not has nothing to do with double jeopardy! Because a different judge on a different case ruled there could be no new trial is irrelevant to the case at hand. Apples and oranges.
  9. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    16 Jul '11 16:32
    Originally posted by scacchipazzo
    Banning of a re-trial does not double jeopardy make, nor does judicial musings. in Clemens' case there was no prosecutorial misconduct, just "error". I guess you fail to grasp the simple concept of "no adjudication means no double jeopardy". I don't care whether you take my comments over a judge's musings. Both you and the judge are wrong! A mistrial me ...[text shortened]... ruled there could be no new trial is irrelevant to the case at hand. Apples and oranges.
    Holding yer breath till you turn blue does not an argument make. The South Carolina case clearly ruled that a retrial was banned on DJ grounds even though there was a mistrial. You stomping your feet doesn't change that.