U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-01-2011, 11:52 AM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,085 posts, read 23,898,417 times
Reputation: 17987

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
She can be, but I doubt it will happen.

As far as the dual sovereignty clause so many like to refer to, I like this guy's take on it:

Casey Anthony Haters Urge Federal Charges In Caylee Anthony's Death Under Dual Sovereinty Doctrine But Don't Grok Federal Law | Popehat
Good link

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post

As Whipper pointed out, the feds don't have jurisdiction in this case since this crime occurred completely within the state of Florida.
You are both wrong. Federal Court does have jurisdiction. Each can try the case one time and is not double jeopardy.

Federal Courts

Like the state courts, the federal system consists of trial courts, appellate courts, and one Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court is the highest court in the nation and is made up of nine justices appointed for life. The Supreme Court hears appeals from the federal courts of appeals and from the highest state courts. However, the Supreme Court's jurisdiction is largely discretionary. That is, it chooses which cases it wants to hear by granting a "writ of certiorari." Certiorari is Latin for "to be informed of." Typically, cases granted certiorari involve a disagreement among the federal appellate courts as to the interpretation of federal law or involve some issue important to the national interest. The chances of a case reaching the Supreme Court are small. Of the thousands of losing parties who petition the Court to review their cases, only about 100 are granted certiorari.


Technically, because of something known as the "dual sovereignty doctrine", the federal government could try Casey Anthony without violating double jeopardy. The federal government and the state of Florida are each considered separate governments. Each considers murder a crime, and each can prosecute a person one time for murders that occur within their jurisdiction.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/timothy-hennis-guilty-1985-triple-murder-trial/story?id=11652956

 
Old 10-01-2011, 12:11 PM
 
9,197 posts, read 9,275,870 times
Reputation: 28813
Quote:
You are both wrong. Federal Court does have jurisdiction. Each can try the case one time and is not double jeopardy.
Quote:
Technically, because of something known as the "dual sovereignty doctrine", the federal government could try Casey Anthony without violating double jeopardy. The federal government and the state of Florida are each considered separate governments. Each considers murder a crime, and each can prosecute a person one time for murders that occur within their jurisdiction.
This discussion about CA has gotten so absurd that I really shouldn't be bothered. In the hope of educating a few people about the Constitution I am writing this post.

The above poster is a good example of the adage that " a little bit of learning is a dangerous thing".

The poster does correctly state that the Federal Government and the State Government are two different sovereigns. In a case where both the US Government and the State Government have jurisdiction, an offender could be tried separately by both.

The problem with the poster's analysis is very simple. The federal government has no jurisdiction over the crime of murder. The exceptions to this would be if the murder was committed on a federal reservation (example: air force base) or if a federal official, agent, or candidate for the US presidency were the victim. A separate federal crime of violating someone's civil rights exists if the victim is of a different race, color, or religion and the motive for the crime is hatred or prejudice against those individuals. That statute doesn't apply to other crimes.

Again, I realize some people are really teed off about what the jury did in the CA. Being "teed off" doesn't allow us to rewrite the Constitution or give the federal courts jurisdiction that they don't have. I really hope this post will put an end to some of the nonsense I keep reading here from those who have no knowledge of the Constitution.
 
Old 10-01-2011, 12:40 PM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,085 posts, read 23,898,417 times
Reputation: 17987
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
.
Again, I realize some people are really teed off about what the jury did in the CA. Being "teed off" doesn't allow us to rewrite the Constitution or give the federal courts jurisdiction that they don't have. I really hope this post will put an end to some of the nonsense I keep reading here from those who have no knowledge of the Constitution.
A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. Actually, your assumption is wrong, not to disappoint you, I'm not teed off and civics certainly isn't my strong point.

The statement that Federal Court has no jurisdiction over Florida couldn't be more false, even I know enough to realize the poster was wrong.

Just trying to determine IF Federal Court can retry the Casey Anthony case.

Thanks for the correction.

Addition
For your reading enjoyment, I'll add another link of those misinformed of Federal Courts ability to try murder cases.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2747850/posts

Last edited by virgode; 10-01-2011 at 01:08 PM..
 
Old 10-01-2011, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,930 posts, read 19,154,540 times
Reputation: 9170
Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
The statement that Federal Court has no jurisdiction over Florida couldn't be more false, even I know enough to realize the poster was wrong.
Actually he and I are both right. Oh, he's a lawyer too. For the federal court to prosecute her for murder would require an element to the case giving them jurisdiction over it. That element does not exist.
 
Old 10-01-2011, 03:50 PM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,085 posts, read 23,898,417 times
Reputation: 17987
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
Actually he and I are both right. Oh, he's a lawyer too. For the federal court to prosecute her for murder would require an element to the case giving them jurisdiction over it. That element does not exist.
Yeah, makes sense, otherwise it would be double jeopardy. If you read margrittes link, just a lot of folks trying to create a reason.

Never know what could happen here though. I have the feeling it aint over.
 
Old 10-01-2011, 06:06 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,788,054 times
Reputation: 7242
Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
The big question, CAN Federal Court retry the Casey Anthony case?
From everything I know about the case, it would be a resounding NO.

And even if they could, what kind of message would that send?



Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
This discussion about CA has gotten so absurd that I really shouldn't be bothered. In the hope of educating a few people about the Constitution I am writing this post.

The above poster is a good example of the adage that " a little bit of learning is a dangerous thing".

The poster does correctly state that the Federal Government and the State Government are two different sovereigns. In a case where both the US Government and the State Government have jurisdiction, an offender could be tried separately by both.

The problem with the poster's analysis is very simple. The federal government has no jurisdiction over the crime of murder. The exceptions to this would be if the murder was committed on a federal reservation (example: air force base) or if a federal official, agent, or candidate for the US presidency were the victim. A separate federal crime of violating someone's civil rights exists if the victim is of a different race, color, or religion and the motive for the crime is hatred or prejudice against those individuals. That statute doesn't apply to other crimes.

Again, I realize some people are really teed off about what the jury did in the CA. Being "teed off" doesn't allow us to rewrite the Constitution or give the federal courts jurisdiction that they don't have. I really hope this post will put an end to some of the nonsense I keep reading here from those who have no knowledge of the Constitution.
Finaly, a lawyer

Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
Yeah, makes sense, otherwise it would be double jeopardy. If you read margrittes link, just a lot of folks trying to create a reason.

Never know what could happen here though. I have the feeling it aint over.
As far as criminal charges in the death of Caylee Anthony by Casey Anthony it is. There is no loopholes, no wiggle room, nothing! The quicker society accepts that the better off they will be.
 
Old 10-01-2011, 06:45 PM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,085 posts, read 23,898,417 times
Reputation: 17987
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post

As far as criminal charges in the death of Caylee Anthony by Casey Anthony it is. There is no loopholes, no wiggle room, nothing! The quicker society accepts that the better off they will be.
It'll take a while before the dust settles, perhaps a guilty pleasure.

I don't know why, but it isn't over. Remember I told you.
 
Old 10-01-2011, 08:02 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,788,054 times
Reputation: 7242
Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
It'll take a while before the dust settles, perhaps a guilty pleasure.

I don't know why, but it isn't over. Remember I told you.
According to the United States Government and it's binding constitution it is..... but if it helps you and others to hold on to false hope, so be it.
 
Old 10-01-2011, 08:59 PM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,085 posts, read 23,898,417 times
Reputation: 17987
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
According to the United States Government and it's binding constitution it is..... but if it helps you and others to hold on to false hope, so be it.
 
Old 10-01-2011, 11:25 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,788,054 times
Reputation: 7242
^^^ I wasn't trying to be sarcastic virgode, the comment wasn't even directed at you personaly but I have noticed that many people were and continue to have pent up anger over all of this. They can't seem to let go of this thing and just accept that CA got off so they say things like, " she could be tried in federal court" or " she will mess up again someday and be back in a jail cell" or " she will be punished someday " things like that.

That is why I said if people want to hold out hope, so be it if it helps them accept the outrcome of this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top