That's the thing, it's not the same murder. Let's say someone beats or rapes someone else gets convicted and gets out and does the same thing to that same person. Under the law, it's a different crime altogether.
In the case of the movie, the false murder charge will be removed however, the actual murder will go to court. Now if the jury or the judge decides to go soft, that's another story.
Yeah its legally a different crime but the defense would be easy since its impossible to legally murder the same person twice and shes already did time...would be interesting to see how it plays out
shyt would be shot down in 5 seconds
Thus goes the premise of Double Jeopardy, last weekend's top grossing movie starring Ashley Judd as Libby and Tommy Lee Jones as her parole officer. Following a series of chaotic scenes, Libby finally finds Nick and threatens, while pointing a gun at him, "I could shoot you, and they can't touch me." Because of the defense of double jeopardy, Libby declares, she cannot be convicted twice for killing Nick. Her parole officer, a former law professor, confirms this legal analysis. But a false interpretation it is. An examination of the Fifth Amendment will explain why.
Prosecutors must plead their cases in very specific terms. They must note the time, place and method of a particular crime. This is done for two reasons. First, the Fifth Amendment protects the defendant from being prosecuted again for the same crime. This is known as "double jeopardy."
The second reason is to protect the prosecutor. For example, imagine a prosecutor bringing a person into court for burglary. If that same person had been tried for burglary last week, he might claim that the law against double jeopardy protects him from being tried in this second instance. However, if the prosecutor shows that last week's burglary took place in Virginia on a Tuesday night and this week's burglary took place in Maryland on a Wednesday night, the prosecutor can prove that double jeopardy doesn't apply--the defendant is being tried for different burglaries.
How does this apply to the movie Double Jeopardy? When Libby was tried for murdering her husband the first time, the prosecutor stated a specific time and place for the crime. If she had actually killed her husband later in the movie, it would've been in a different city and time, making it a different crime. Therefore, double jeopardy would not apply, and she would be accused of murder. Thus, David Weisberg and Douglas S. Cook, writers of Double Jeopardy, not only penned a mediocre screenplay but would flunk a first-year law exam as well.
Libby's true remedy would be to bring proof to the proper authorities that her husband is still alive. The court would then nullify her original conviction and bring charges against her husband.
British playwright Oscar Wilde once said that life imitates art far more than art imitates life. Anyone who believes it is possible to commit a crime and claim the defense of double jeopardy will be sadly mistaken. In this case, imitating art could put you on death row.