Is it a practical impossibility to try two people for the same crime?

[Imran Siddiqui]

You really aren't understanding the point, are you? This isn't a conspiracy situation, but a crime committed by a single person. You go after that single person. He gets acquitted. Then you try to go after a second single person for the same crime.

[asleepathewheel]

Obviously conspiracies and accessories can be charged and convicted, that isn't the thrust (I hope) of Mark's op.

Since I love to feel special and share my stories of my criminal defense experiences:
The "largest" case I've had involved 14 co-defendants. I had 4 of them on charges way way below my paygrade-common nuisance visitation. Of course, they all walked with dismissed charges-co-counsels and I moved for severance and set all 14 for trials. mwahaha.

[SlowwHand]

I'm saying if more than one person is there, more than one is guilty. That's all I'm saying. You have the perfect right to disagree.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I'm saying if more than one person is there, more than one is guilty. That's all I'm saying. You have the perfect right to disagree.

You don't really read other people's posts, do you?

[SlowwHand]

"Is it a practical impossibility to try two people for the same crime?"

That's the title of the thread, Imran. Do you read?

[DRoseDARs]

CSI Vegas had an episode like this: Some kid is accused of murdering a classmate, but his brainy little sister manages to game the system by presenting a plausible story that she did it that fit the evidence. Her brother got off the hook, but at the end of the episode she whispered into Sara Siddle's ear that she really DIDN'T commit the murder. If she were of the same age as her murderer brother, she most certainly COULD and WOULD be tried for the same crime new trial (original one overturned or dismissed), problem is she was far too young to be tried as an adult whereas he wasn't, hence the original murder trial.

As for Slowwy's armed robbery scenario, maybe I'm wrong here but if the getaway driver remains in the vehicle the whole time and/or never once has or fires a weapon during the robbery, but his buddies committing the robbery manage to kill someone in the execution of the robbery, the driver can also be tried for murder despite not having pulled the trigger or even having touched the murder weapon. Is this true in some states or all? I'm asking, not stating, so don't be an ass in answering.

[MarkG]

Re: Is it a practical impossibility to try two people for the same crime?

as i said in the OP, the situation is this

Originally posted by MarkG
I just watched the better half of Presumed Innocent with Harrison Ford.

basically the story is that a prosecutor is tried for the murder of a sexy blonde colleague and it ends up that it was his wife that did it (yes she hit her in the head with hammer )

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
"Is it a practical impossibility to try two people for the same crime?"

That's the title of the thread, Imran. Do you read?

So you are confirming Imran's point that you only read the title and not the actual post?

[Colon™]

This thread clearly shows the benefits of cryptic and nonsensical thread titles. The viewer is lost and will read the OP for guidance.

[Colon™]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
As for Slowwy's armed robbery scenario, maybe I'm wrong here but if the getaway driver remains in the vehicle the whole time and/or never once has or fires a weapon during the robbery, but his buddies committing the robbery manage to kill someone in the execution of the robbery, the driver can also be tried for murder despite not having pulled the trigger or even having touched the murder weapon. Is this true in some states or all? I'm asking, not stating, so don't be an ass in answering.

If the driver isn't charged as an accomplice, then what is he going to be charged for? Sitting in a car and subsequently driving it?

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Colon™


If the driver isn't charged as an accomplice, then what is he going to be charged for?

I can't imagine any modern legal system NOT charging the getaway driver as an accomplice. Maybe Europe is a little more backwards than anyone knew...

Sitting in a car and subsequently driving it?

That would meet the definition of being a getaway driver.

[Colon™]

1. Asks dumb question
2. Requests others not to be an ass when responding
3. Is an ass when getting response

[DRoseDARs]

Sensitive much? You DO notice the smileys there, right?

[DRoseDARs]

Anyway, if Wikipedia is to believed then yes, an accomplice CAN be charged with murder not-of-their-doing under US law, but the USSC ruled in '82 that they cannot be executed for the murder provided "if there is no evidence that the accomplice knew or even suspected that the primary wrongdoer might commit murder." Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982)

[Colon™]

I know what wiki-article would help you a lot more, but I'm not giving the link.