Entry 13: Amendment 5

Double Jeopardy for Convicted Shooter Trail Starts this Week

http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/phillynow/2010/05/18/double-jeopardy-for-convicted-shooter-trial-starts-this-week/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=double-jeopardy-for-convicted-shooter-trial-starts-this-week

Constitutional Connection:

Amendment V, Bill of Rights

"...nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy..."

During the time of August in 2007 charges were filed against William Barnes, who was once convicted of shoot a police officer William Barclay in 1966. He served 20 years in prison for this crime, and has been free since. In 07' Barnes was jeopardized once again, except that this this he was being trialed for the murder of the officer Barclay.

This article and event demonstrates a violation of Amendment V in the Bill of Rights. This amendment protects citizens rights to no self-incrimination, no double jeopardy, right to due process, and habeus corpus. No double jeopardy basically means a person cannot be convicted or trialed for the same crime twice, hence double. In this case Barnes was being trialed again for the same crime, but for a different type of felony. This case clearly violates the rights protected under the fifth amendment, since its against the amendment to be double jeopardized.

In my opinion I believe also that this case is obstructing the position of the "no double jeopardy" clause in the fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights. Sending this man back to trial was and would be a wrong thing to do, and for the attorney to once again start this trial knowing of the fifth amendment was just plain faulty. Okay Barnes shot the guy many years back, but it would have literally cause him to die in 2007. I understand the officer could have been emotionally damaged, but why become a cop if your not prepared to endure the physical and emotional burden?