|
| 01 Mar 2016 10:01 PM |
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Memorandum Opinion to Federal Judge Mauv Feasibility of Reopening a Tampered Court Proceeding March 1, 2016
On the recent case of United States v. Adam11087, Soljakirk, et al., various high-profile employees of the Department of Homeland Security were prosecuted for crimes committed in the performance of their duties as employees of this department. In high-profile criminal cases, the judge must screen jurors for any potential link to defendants, and failure to do so can result in a tampered jury. One might ask what constitutes a high-profile case, and the definition is fluid; in general terms, when a defendant is potentially well-known (such as a high-rank in a government department might be) or if the case is "juicy," there is a high risk for people the defendant knows to be placed on the jury. To keep track of when this happens, the Department of Justice informally refers to such a case as a high-profile case, and the judge is expected to be very thorough in identifying possibly biased jurors.
Please do not assume that a biased juror is consciously trying to sway justice; it is simply human nature to subconsciously act biased in a situation in which the juror and the defendant know each other. More often than not, a biased juror does not consciously act prejudiced; prior feelings just act as a lens through which evidence presented is seen. As such, the Department of Justice isn't immediately suspecting foul play, but the federal courts did approve a preliminary audit of the Homeland Security Department to prove that no foul play occurred.
Now, on to the question of if United States v. Adam11087, Soljakirk, et al. can be reopened. Since most of the defendants were found guilty, it is not unheard of to give a trial de novo, and usually it is in the defendants' favor to have a new trial after being found guilty. However, one might argue that this violates double jeopardy to have the same case tried in the same court of law. According to the 5th Amendment, "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." To many, this seems like you may never--like, ever--repeat a trial for the same offense in the same court, but that isn't entirely true. Note that it says "put in jeopardy of life or limb." As such, it is explicitly stating that it is double jeopardy only if the trial placed a significant risk that the defendant could be convicted fairly.
However, it is noteworthy to remember that two of the jurors were actually employees of the Department of Homeland Security, the same department that all of the defendants worked in. As such, they must have had some working relationship, meaning that the trial was inherently unfair, as described above. This, to me, does not seem like it actually put the defendants in jeopardy of life or limb; they had a very high chance that the two jurors would vote in their favor (not guilty) just because they knew each other. If only one juror was a DHLS employee, I would be less uncomfortable; a jury cannot be hung with only one dissenter. However, with even so few as two jurors in dissent, a jury can be hung, leading to dismissal of charges or a mistrial; this would substantially benefit the defendant, for obvious reasons. (Dismissal of charges means they go free, and a mistrial often leads to dismissal later on in our courts.)
As such, the defendants weren't put in jeopardy of life or limb, so double jeopardy doesn't apply. Therefore, it is of the opinion of the Attorney General--and the Department of Justice as a whole--that a new trial may be given to each defendant.
Dutifully Signed this 1st Day of March, 2016: Synapsic (Attorney_General), Attorney General of the United States
Fauxtillion, Deputy Attorney General of the United States |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
Laedere
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 23601 |
|
| |
|
| 01 Mar 2016 10:15 PM |
| Define the context of "juicy" |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| 01 Mar 2016 10:31 PM |
| go back to japan you disgrace we don't want you here |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
U_7
|
  |
| Joined: 30 Dec 2014 |
| Total Posts: 21 |
|
| |
Kiroll
|
  |
| Joined: 26 Apr 2012 |
| Total Posts: 9285 |
|
| |