Re: First Murderer - 10 Binary

---

@jpcerutti1 wrote:

---

@CasperTheLich wrote:

actually, does being falsely convicted of murder and then exonerated, make being retried for the attempted murder of the same person during the same incident double-jeopardy, legally speaking?

---

No, they are two different crimes. Even in a system where double jeopardy could be an issue claiming innocence of one crime because you were busy committing a different crime will not keep you from being charged with the other one if acquitted/exonerated of the first.

---

Although you could get off anyway if you can prove they violated your 5th Amendment rights in the process

That assumes that the Nexus doesn't have the authority to try him for murder (attempted or successful). He committed a crime, so detaining him is pretty lawful.

---

@jpcerutti1 wrote:

---

@CasperTheLich wrote:

actually, does being falsely convicted of murder and then exonerated, make being retried for the attempted murder of the same person during the same incident double-jeopardy, legally speaking?

---

No, they are two different crimes. Even in a system where double jeopardy could be an issue claiming innocence of one crime because you were busy committing a different crime will not keep you from being charged with the other one if acquitted/exonerated of the first.

---

I respectfully disagree.

Nilken was already convicted by the time Ryder arrives on scene. The latest he could have been charged with attempted murder would be later in the trial once the jury is deciding their verdict. The jury is able to acquit him of the murder charge, but find him guilty of the lesser charge of attempted murder at that point, but no later. Exonerating him and then attempting to put him on trial for essentially the same crime, but by using a lesser included offense, would be considered Double Jeopardy.

That's assuming Double Jeopardy is a thing on-board the Nexus. We don't know if they are using Alliance law or attempting to implement a new system of law in Andromeda.

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:

I respectfully disagree.

Nilken was already convicted by the time Ryder arrives on scene. The latest he could have been charged with attempted murder would be later in the trial once the jury is deciding their verdict. The jury is able to acquit him of the murder charge, but find him guilty of the lesser charge of attempted murder at that point, but no later. Exonerating him and then attempting to put him on trial for essentially the same crime, but by using a lesser included offense, would be considered Double Jeopardy.

That's assuming Double Jeopardy is a thing on-board the Nexus. We don't know if they are using Alliance law or attempting to implement a new system of law in Andromeda.

---

The Initiative has its own legal code. It's called Tann's Law.

---

@fudgietroll wrote:

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:

I respectfully disagree.

Nilken was already convicted by the time Ryder arrives on scene. The latest he could have been charged with attempted murder would be later in the trial once the jury is deciding their verdict. The jury is able to acquit him of the murder charge, but find him guilty of the lesser charge of attempted murder at that point, but no later. Exonerating him and then attempting to put him on trial for essentially the same crime, but by using a lesser included offense, would be considered Double Jeopardy.

That's assuming Double Jeopardy is a thing on-board the Nexus. We don't know if they are using Alliance law or attempting to implement a new system of law in Andromeda.

---

The Initiative has its own legal code. It's called Tann's Law.

---

Fair enough. 🙂

5th amendment? Double Jeopardy?  You do realise that those are american laws and these are not even applicable even on other part of the current planet earth lol  

In the ME universe(not MEA, before the angarians), humanity is the newest species to join the club, I seriously doubt our current laws would have any application there.  However there's always the greater law of fairness and of justice(although an asari justicar would have slayed all of them, Tann included, should have smuggled one on board!) lol.

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:
Double Jeopardy isn't exclusively an American law. Canada, Mexico, and every member of the European Council (which is pretty much every European nation) have some form of Double Jeopardy protection in place.

---

Yup but that's approximately 20% the current worlds population.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_continents_by_population

Agreed with the rest of the points though.

---

@VladVonCastein wrote:

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:
Double Jeopardy isn't exclusively an American law. Canada, Mexico, and every member of the European Council (which is pretty much every European nation) have some form of Double Jeopardy protection in place.

---

Yup but that's approximately 20% the current worlds population.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_continents_by_population

Agreed with the rest of the points though.

---

I was just stating that the Double Jeopardy law isn't merely located in America.

I understand that a majority of the world may not necessarily have the same laws in effect, but you're going to see Western ideas about law discussed on an English speaking board with a game created by Western developers, who (in my opinion) geared the game towards a Western audience. 

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:

---

@VladVonCastein wrote:

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:
Double Jeopardy isn't exclusively an American law. Canada, Mexico, and every member of the European Council (which is pretty much every European nation) have some form of Double Jeopardy protection in place.

---

Yup but that's approximately 20% the current worlds population.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_continents_by_population

Agreed with the rest of the points though.

---

I was just stating that the Double Jeopardy law isn't merely located in America.

I understand that a majority of the world may not necessarily have the same laws in effect, but you're going to see Western ideas about law discussed on an English speaking board with a game created by Western developers, who (in my opinion) geared the game towards a Western audience. 

---

Ah that's a totally different story, then it's not about global/galactic law but about target audiences of a game and guess I can agree with that.

---

@VladVonCastein wrote:

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:

---

@VladVonCastein wrote:

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:
Double Jeopardy isn't exclusively an American law. Canada, Mexico, and every member of the European Council (which is pretty much every European nation) have some form of Double Jeopardy protection in place.

---

Yup but that's approximately 20% the current worlds population.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_continents_by_population

Agreed with the rest of the points though.

---

I was just stating that the Double Jeopardy law isn't merely located in America.

I understand that a majority of the world may not necessarily have the same laws in effect, but you're going to see Western ideas about law discussed on an English speaking board with a game created by Western developers, who (in my opinion) geared the game towards a Western audience. 

---

Ah that's a totally different story, then it's not about global/galactic law but about target audiences of a game and guess I can agree with that.

---

Yeah, I wasn't trying to argue global/galactic law. I couldn't figure out how to quote (Figured it would do it automatically with the reply option on people's posts, lol) which probably helped add to the confusion, sorry about that. My post about Double Jeopardy (before we started replaying to one another) was directed at someone on the first page saying that it if Double Jeopardy existed in this universe that it wouldn't apply to Rensus Nilken's case. 

---

@fudgietroll wrote:

---

@jpcerutti1 wrote:

---

@CasperTheLich wrote:

actually, does being falsely convicted of murder and then exonerated, make being retried for the attempted murder of the same person during the same incident double-jeopardy, legally speaking?

---

No, they are two different crimes. Even in a system where double jeopardy could be an issue claiming innocence of one crime because you were busy committing a different crime will not keep you from being charged with the other one if acquitted/exonerated of the first.

---

Although you could get off anyway if you can prove they violated your 5th Amendment rights in the process

---

Double jeopardy is where you can't be convicted of the same crime twice- once you have been convicted and served your time you cant then be conviced and serve a different punishment for that same crime. There is a movie about this where someone's husband fakes his death and she gets convicted of his murder and serves her time. He was a real *, set it all up for a change of identity so he could take their kid and live with her sister. Later on she is able to outright kill him when she tracks him down - and not be convicted because she already served her time for killing him to begin with.

As for this quest in game.. the moral dilema I saw here was not one of him comitting a crime, it was obvious he did but the circumstances that lead to him pulling the trigger. They all knew following his order was going to get them all killed.  Was he really supposed to sit back and let everyone die because of one idiot giving a wrong order, or deal with the idiot before that could happen. That is the reason why I feel letting him off free really should have been the best choice, only it didn't work out that way, making exhile the better choice. There is rare times when following a direct order isn't in everyones best interest, some mutinies have merit and sometimes force has to be used.

That wouldn't be a case of double jeopardy either. Otherwise you could never get convicted of a traffic offense twice in your life...

I'll stand behind that attempted murder conviction with a prison sentence to be served after cryo, IMO. 

---

@arthurh3535 wrote:

That wouldn't be a case of double jeopardy either. Otherwise you could never get convicted of a traffic offense twice in your life...

I'll stand behind that attempted murder conviction with a prison sentence to be served after cryo, IMO. 

---

No no, I mean the same crime. Not going out running a red light .. then going out and doing it again.. thats two seperate crimes..

However, she already served time for killing him .. and was released.. you can't kill someone twice.. dead is dead. So in this case it was the *same* crime because the first time she was innocent. Thus she already served a sentence for that crime and didn’t have to serve it a second time.

---

@Nykara360 wrote:

No no, I mean the same crime. Not going out running a red light .. then going out and doing it again.. thats two seperate crimes..However, she already served time for killing him .. and was released.. you can't kill someone twice.. dead is dead. So in this case it was the *same* crime because the first time she was innocent. Thus she already served a sentence for that crime and didn’t have to serve it a second time.

---

No, because it's at a later date, a different situation. The only difference is that you have come to realize you failed to succeed the first time. It's not just 'killed Bob' it's 'killed Bob on Tuesday' vs. 'actually killed Bob on Thursday'.

double jeopardy prevents someone from being tried for the same crime more then once. it doesn't prevent someone from being tried for committing the same crime repeatedly, just from being tried for the same crime repeatedly.

for instance if someone is tried for 1st degree premeditated murder, and say, acquitted... you can't comeback and try charging him with 2nd degree murder and then manslaughter to get another go or 2 at that same crime, even if you can make a go at reorganizing the case for it. double-jeopardy has already attached. that's why i figured he couldn't be recharged/reindited for attempted murder for the same incident. having been already tried and convicted, and then exonerated.

The thing is, he's guilty.  He tried to kill the security officer. He thought he succeeded. Someone just happened to kill his target before he missed (and probably would have tried again). He willfully pulled the trigger in the attempt.

---

@arthurh3535 wrote:

The thing is, he's guilty.  He tried to kill the security officer. He thought he succeeded. Someone just happened to kill his target before he missed (and probably would have tried again). He willfully pulled the trigger in the attempt.

---

that he did, however... as someone already stated if this was a court of law in the US, and likely the EU as well, they wouldn't be able to charge him again for the same incident, now, if he actually attempted to kill what-his-name... reynolds? a second time they'd have had to try him with that and the top count at the same time (and no continuing to fire at whats his face doesn't mean a new count for each bullet), as you can't split jointly prosecutable offenses, the only time this isn't the case, is when new information is reviled during a trial that alludes to new separate crimes, however it's not clear how, say attempted murder, and actual murder are treated in this case. now, i'm not a lawyer, however my mother has been a court reporter for a short stint, and a paralegal secretary for a few decades (though mostly non-criminal), and i've picked up a few things on my own, i'm a reader, and court/crime stuff interests me.

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:

---

@jpcerutti1 wrote:

---

@CasperTheLich wrote:

actually, does being falsely convicted of murder and then exonerated, make being retried for the attempted murder of the same person during the same incident double-jeopardy, legally speaking?

---

No, they are two different crimes. Even in a system where double jeopardy could be an issue claiming innocence of one crime because you were busy committing a different crime will not keep you from being charged with the other one if acquitted/exonerated of the first.

---

I respectfully disagree.

Nilken was already convicted by the time Ryder arrives on scene. The latest he could have been charged with attempted murder would be later in the trial once the jury is deciding their verdict. The jury is able to acquit him of the murder charge, but find him guilty of the lesser charge of attempted murder at that point, but no later. Exonerating him and then attempting to put him on trial for essentially the same crime, but by using a lesser included offense, would be considered Double Jeopardy.

That's assuming Double Jeopardy is a thing on-board the Nexus. We don't know if they are using Alliance law or attempting to implement a new system of law in Andromeda.

---

What do you disagree with? If the trial is over there will be no acquittal. It is over. There can be a suspension of sentence and remanding him over for a new trial - but that's not an option you are given. We're only allowed to either let the conviction stand, or, to pardon and drop all charges.

That only would apply if attempted murder was one of an array of options a jury was given with his case. Any additional crimes a trial or investigation uncovers are not somehow covered by a trial on a separate charge. Again, you are assuming US law applies... in the majority of the world and in a different galaxy it probably doesn't. Nor does double jeopardy apply here under US laws. If one of the charges they left off the list for a jury to consider was unlawful discharge of a weapon they could go back and try him for that as well.

I think you are confusing the judicial system's ability to combine multiple charges into a single trial and double jeopardy. Charges are usually combined as cost containment - but you can be tried on each charge individually too - and they will certainly have an additional trial if your alibi for the first trial is you were committing some other crime.

---

@jpcerutti1 wrote:

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:

---

@jpcerutti1 wrote:

---

@CasperTheLich wrote:

actually, does being falsely convicted of murder and then exonerated, make being retried for the attempted murder of the same person during the same incident double-jeopardy, legally speaking?

---

No, they are two different crimes. Even in a system where double jeopardy could be an issue claiming innocence of one crime because you were busy committing a different crime will not keep you from being charged with the other one if acquitted/exonerated of the first.

---

I respectfully disagree.

Nilken was already convicted by the time Ryder arrives on scene. The latest he could have been charged with attempted murder would be later in the trial once the jury is deciding their verdict. The jury is able to acquit him of the murder charge, but find him guilty of the lesser charge of attempted murder at that point, but no later. Exonerating him and then attempting to put him on trial for essentially the same crime, but by using a lesser included offense, would be considered Double Jeopardy.

That's assuming Double Jeopardy is a thing on-board the Nexus. We don't know if they are using Alliance law or attempting to implement a new system of law in Andromeda.

---

What do you disagree with? If the trial is over there will be no acquittal. It is over. There can be a suspension of sentence and remanding him over for a new trial - but that's not an option you are given. We're only allowed to either let the conviction stand, or, to pardon and drop all charges.

That only would apply if attempted murder was one of an array of options a jury was given with his case. Any additional crimes a trial or investigation uncovers are not somehow covered by a trial on a separate charge. Again, you are assuming US law applies... in the majority of the world and in a different galaxy it probably doesn't. Nor does double jeopardy apply here under US laws. If one of the charges they left off the list for a jury to consider was unlawful discharge of a weapon they could go back and try him for that as well.

I think you are confusing the judicial system's ability to combine multiple charges into a single trial and double jeopardy. Charges are usually combined as cost containment - but you can be tried on each charge individually too - and they will certainly have an additional trial if your alibi for the first trial is you were committing some other crime.

---

What I had disagreed with initially was the two separate crimes bit. Wouldn't attempted murder be a lesser included charge to murder?

The charge for attempted murder consists of; 1) having a weapon. 2) intent to kill the victim.

A murder charge would include those previously mentioned, but with the actual act of killing the victim. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, I believe that exonerating the individual of murder would basically clear him/her of the crime, and that trying to get them for one of the lesser included charges to the crime (murder) would constitute double jeopardy, and that a retrial would not be given. 

---

@Stubbs-WH wrote:
What I had disagreed with initially was the two separate crimes bit. Wouldn't attempted murder be a lesser included charge to murder?

The charge for attempted murder consists of; 1) having a weapon. 2) intent to kill the victim.

A murder charge would include those previously mentioned, but with the actual act of killing the victim. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, I believe that exonerating the individual of murder would basically clear him/her of the crime, and that trying to get them for one of the lesser included charges to the crime (murder) would constitute double jeopardy, and that a retrial would not be given.

---

If there had been an included attempted murder charge (which I don't think is included in actual murder trials. It's sort of included in the intent to kill that succeeded), it would just be a matter of clearing him of the one charge and seeing what sentence he should serve for the attempted murder charge.

This is definitely a sticky legal question that lawyers could play with for years. Yes, he did commit a crime. However, it was part of the crime we just had to acquit you of. Therefore, from a double jeopardy standpoint it could go either way, and a good lawyer would probably be able to beat the rap.

---

@jpcerutti1 wrote:

No. The only way it would be considered double jeopardy is if they presented the jury with a cascading slate of charges, which they sometimes do, and attempted murder was one of the options the jury could of originally find him guilty of. With a dead guy they usually don't. US law/trials usually only has mention of the weapon used to commit a felony if that will change/worsen the classification (resulting in a harsher sentence) or move the trial jurisdiction to federal court (again, usually harsher sentences). A lot of times they don't bother to add all the minor charges in the trial - since the sentences are almost always concurrent if they were all charges for the same crime (instead of a series of crimes) and there's not a lot gained by tacking on a lot of short concurrent sentences with a longer sentence. If you're acquitted, that becomes an option though.

If you're going to serve, even with parole, more time than you would have gotten for the minor charges there's no point in adding them. 

Really, all of that is moot. If your original judgement is ruled invalid for *any* reason once you've been convicted all you "win" is a new trial. Double jeopardy keeps you from being tried again on the same charges, if you were acquitted, even if there is new evidence. If something like this happened in RL the judgement would be overturned on appeal and the defendant would be granted a new trial, if the prosecutor wished to file charges again - not exonerated. Odds are, the second time around they'd go with attempted murder... but they could still try for murder again as well.

Now, if they acquitted and further digging found he actually did kill him they couldn't try it again because of double jeopardy.🥳

---

actually, as far as i'm aware... not true.
first off, you can't split jointly prosecutable offenses, if you could, an unscrupulous prosecutor could launch endless indictments that don't even have to be legitimate for the purpose of keeping someone in jail without actual cause. and second it violates the defendant's right to a speedy trial. so, if you knowingly don't use it, you lose it.

and this isn't a buffet, you can't decide to prosecute someone for 2nd degree murder, then failing to convict, go for a shot at them with manslaughter for the same incident. that's a big no, no.

---edit
Quoted from textbook
The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution states that no person shall “be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.” The double jeopardy clause bars second prosecutions after either acquittal or conviction, and prohibits multiple punishments for the same offense

---edit again

don't know what happened here, but fixed it.

---

@CasperTheLich wrote:

---

@jpcerutti1 wrote:

No. The only way it would be considered double jeopardy is if they presented the jury with a cascading slate of charges, which they sometimes do, and attempted murder was one of the options the jury could of originally find him guilty of. With a dead guy they usually don't. US law/trials usually only has mention of the weapon used to commit a felony if that will change/worsen the classification (resulting in a harsher sentence) or move the trial jurisdiction to federal court (again, usually harsher sentences). A lot of times they don't bother to add all the minor charges in the trial - since the sentences are almost always concurrent if they were all charges for the same crime (instead of a series of crimes) and there's not a lot gained by tacking on a lot of short concurrent sentences with a longer sentence. If you're acquitted, that becomes an option though.

If you're going to serve, even with parole, more time than you would have gotten for the minor charges there's no point in adding them. 

Really, all of that is moot. If your original judgement is ruled invalid for *any* reason once you've been convicted all you "win" is a new trial. Double jeopardy keeps you from being tried again on the same charges, if you were acquitted, even if there is new evidence. If something like this happened in RL the judgement would be overturned on appeal and the defendant would be granted a new trial, if the prosecutor wished to file charges again - not exonerated. Odds are, the second time around they'd go with attempted murder... but they could still try for murder again as well.

Now, if they acquitted and further digging found he actually did kill him they couldn't try it again because of double jeopardy.🥳

---

actually, as far as i'm aware... not true.

first off, you can't split jointly prosecutable offenses, if you could, an unscrupulous prosecutor could launch endless indictments that don't even have to be legitimate for the purpose of keeping someone in jail without actual cause. and second it violates the defendant's right to a speedy trial. so, if you knowingly don't use it, you lose it.

and this isn't a buffet, you can't decide to prosecute someone for 2nd degree murder, then failing to convict, go for a shot at them with manslaughter for the same incident. that's a big no, no.

---

I agree......

But in this case, I look at it being more under Martial Law, and thus Tann's law more than anything close to US or European Law.  I kinda feel since it is in a life or death situation with lack of elected officials and armed rebellion going on, the laws are pretty much what Tann and maybe the other top people on the Nexus says it is.  Not the best idea, but it is what it is, which is one reason why I always just boot his butt off the station.  I can't see letting someone stay there who has proven he will shoot people in the back if he doesn't like what they are doing.  The very minimum I want from an ally in battle is that they will be shooting at the same type of enemies that I am shooting at......and not shooting my allies/friends/people.....