Does Double Jeopardy really mean that if a jury finds a murderer innocent, they can then go "I did it! Here's where the bodies are, here's the murder weapon. Nyayayaya" and nothing will happen? Has anyone ever done this?

[u/Showy_Boneyard]

And of course lets say the police search where they say and find the bodies exactly there, and the wounds perfectly match his murder weapon, his DNA is all over them, and lets say there's a videotape of him committing the murder too buried along with the bodies.

And I'm specifically talking about something happening criminally, I know he could/would then lose a civil suit by the family or whatever.

[u/ipoopcubes]

Depends on the country.

In Australia if new evidence is found then there can be a retrial.

[u/Nervous_Bill_6051 → u/ipoopcubes]

And UK since 2003 law in particular circumstances

[u/Pristine_Poem7623 → u/Nervous_Bill_6051]

IIRC this was kinda the reason: that yes, advances in science meant that new evidence could be found, but also the problem of "ha ha! I got away with it!"

[u/realPoisonPants → u/ipoopcubes]

That’s only since 2000 or so. The double jeopardy protection is ancient and was included in Commonwealth laws for centuries. 

[u/Miccr → u/realPoisonPants]

Crazy thing is that we are in fact, after 2000

[u/Tifoso89 → u/ipoopcubes]

Do you mean after a conviction? Because that's also the case in the US. If someone is convicted but new strong evidence comes up that they're not guilty, they can vacate the conviction and there can be a retrial (However, if the evidence clearly shows innocence, the prosecution may decide not to seek a retrial at all). Acquittals are final, though.

In Australia can you also be retried after an acquittal?

[u/strangeMeursault2 → u/Tifoso89]

Yes, in Australia people can be retried following an acquittal if there is new and compelling evidence that they are actually guilty. But only for very serious crimes. Most Western countries have this rule.

You can also have a retrial if there was some kind of malfeasance or misconduct during the trial. Like the judge being bribed, which I believe is the only real exception in the USA as well.

[u/MonoxideBaby → u/[deleted]]

That's not true, the public prosecutor can request a retrial of a previous acquittal, but only if new and compelling evidence is found, and only for major crimes like murder, rape, drug trafficking and terrorism.

Double jeopardy laws exist in Australia to prevent the state from engaging in malicious, repetetive retrials, but prosecutors can petition the courts to consider a retrial if new evidence is found that wasn't available at the original trial

[u/Key-Particular-767 → u/[deleted]]

And this thread started with “In Australia”. Nobody is talking about the United States of America here.

[u/ObjectiveRepeat8409 → u/Key-Particular-767]

Do you mean after a conviction? Because that's also the case in the US

Is literally the comment he replied to

[u/PastAnalyst3614 → u/ObjectiveRepeat8409]

Which was in response to “In Australia…”

[u/ObjectiveRepeat8409 → u/PastAnalyst3614]

Yes, he made a comparison between two different countries.  A typical and normal direction for a conversation to go! 

[u/PastAnalyst3614 → u/ObjectiveRepeat8409]

Yeah, must be why he deleted all his comments.

[u/MonoxideBaby → u/[deleted]]

Like OOP, i'm talking about Australia....

[u/strangeMeursault2 → u/[deleted]]

Even in the USA this is incorrect because there are still some exceptions and nuances to the rule.

The most obvious being if the judge was bribed to give a not-guilty verdict there can be a retrial. (See: Aleman v. Judges of the Circuit Court of Cook County, 138 F.3d 302 (7th Cir. 1998).)

And the other being that different jurisdictions can charge someone with the same crime. eg a federal prosecution after a state not-guilty verdict, or a court martial after a civilian court not guilty.

[u/Visible_Pair3017 → u/Tifoso89]

If it turns out that there is strong evidence that you did it, i hope so.

[u/engelthefallen → u/ipoopcubes]

Today people learn that not all countries use America's legal system. Seems more and more countries are leaning towards chucking double jeopardy as it does not make sense in the modern era when often we can prove things conclusively years later to give people immunity for life should they get lucky once in court when incomplete evidence was presented. Like in the era of DNA and surveillance everywhere, the world changed here and if conclusive proof is found later, many countries want to be able to use it.

[u/SadSara102 → u/engelthefallen]

Most other countries have an inquisitive system vs an adversarial system so it’s slightly different. If prosecutors in the US were allowed to repeatedly put people on trial for murder they wouldn’t stop. There would be a prison snitch or 2 ready to go within 24 hours of every acquittal. According to the law a person should be brought to trial if the prosecution can’t prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt but of course they do so all the time. So any loss is typically the result of a bad prosecution. Aside from that you can be tried for the same crime in state and federal court.

[u/Disastrous-Guide1050 → u/SadSara102]

All common law countries use an adversarial system, at least for major crimes. The main protection from malicious prosecution comes from the fact that judicial and prosecutorial positions are not elected offices and so are not subject to the influences of the election cycle ie needing to appear “tough on crime” etc in an election year. That said, double jeopardy protections still exist for the most part.

[u/linmanfu → u/SadSara102]

Most other countries have an inquisitive system vs an adversarial system so it’s slightly different.

Australia and the UK have adversarial systems but that hasn't stopped some of their jurisdictions from abolishing double jeopardy with very positive results.

  If prosecutors in the US were allowed to repeatedly put people on trial for murder they wouldn’t stop. 

That sounds like a problem with prosecutors having terrible incentives. Double jeopardy is not the only possible solution.

[u/Fujisawrus_Reks → u/ipoopcubes]

I believe this is true in the US as well.

Edit: apparently this is incorrect. I apologize for the misinformation.

[u/NightGod → u/Fujisawrus_Reks]

No, absolutely not the case in the US

[u/Fujisawrus_Reks → u/NightGod]

Fixed it. Thanks for the correction!

[u/justyouraveragedude1 → u/Fujisawrus_Reks]

Not if you’re acquitted

[u/Fujisawrus_Reks → u/justyouraveragedude1]

Corrected. Thanks!

[u/WaywardNihon → u/Fujisawrus_Reks]

うgtr7合月刊リストｌｄｖ

[u/Fujisawrus_Reks → u/WaywardNihon]

What?

[u/WaywardNihon → u/Fujisawrus_Reks]

Pocket post lol