The Double Jeopardy Clause: Getting Away with Murder

The fifth Amendment to the U.S Constitution is meant to ensure that the government is unable to abuse it's authority by making someone pay for their crime more than once. It states that "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb". Without this, the government would be allowed to prosecute a person for the same crime that they have already been convicted of, over and over again, as a means of harassment and/or oppression. They would even be allowed to put a man on trial for a crime that he has already been declared innocent of. How unfair would that be? So one can understand why is was necessary to add that clause to the Constitution because it was with the intention of protecting the people. But what about when that clause allows one to get away with cold-blooded murder?

For example, everyone remembers O.J Simpson right? He was a famous football player who just happened to be on trial for the murder of his ex-wife and a stranger who was merely trying to do a good deed. He was put on trial for double murder and because he had one heck of a team defending him, he got off. He was acquitted. Let's say that new evidence came into the picture after his acquittal, maybe something that proved that he was there at the time of the murder. Maybe a picture, point being, with this hypothetical piece of evidence, the courts would hypothetically be able to put him away for life. Guess what, he can not be put on trial again because the courts had already reached a decision. So even with this groundbreaking piece of evidence nothing can be done because they already said that he was innocent. The fact that he wrote a book entitled If I did it, basically admitting his guilt, gives the world a glimpse of how the double jeopardy clause, which is meant to protect, can fail those whom deserve justice ( like the victims families).

Now, this clause does not always fail. There are situations in which it would seem as if the Double Jeopardy clause should apply to a case, but it doesn't always. For example, if a person shot another while standing over the border of a state, then both states he was in can put him on trial for the same crime. It's called the "separate sovereigns'" rule, which allows two states to prosecute a suspect for one crime. Another scenario in which the Double Jeopardy clause does not apply is if a judgment was in any illegal way coerced. Let's say that a man bribes the judge to acquit him, then the man can be put on trial again because the judgment wasn't real. If a trial is dismissed or declared a mistrial, then the case can be tried again because a final judgment was never passed.

So the law isn't going to always protect the innocent, bring justice to those who deserve it, or keep murderers off of our streets, but we have no choice but to hope that murderers aren't able to use the Double Jeopardy clause to get away with murder...legally.