Double Jeopardy Research Paper

The Double jeopardy law originated in The ancient civilizations relied on the blood dispute to provide justice when one person killed another, the relatives of a dead person had a duty to avenge death. While the blood feud manifested harsh "retributive" justice, it could, in theory, lead to an endless series of murders as each death was avenged. The Greek dramatist Aeschylus dramatized a cycle of revenge of the blood faith in the Oresteian trilogy, which ended with Greek gods deciding that an essay is a better way to achieve justice. Part of the reason for replacing the blood contest with a trial is to allow the cycle of vengeance to end, provide a final result to a dispute, and create litigation rest. But to protect the purpose of the results, there must exist a principle that prohibits a new judgment of the same case or the same question. A double-risk principle has been part of Western legal systems for thousands of …show more content…
Now after stating that express how you would feel if you had found out that the defendant previously acquitted on the trial for the murder of one of your family members but you then they end up murdering that family member of yours but you cannot find any new evidence then the defendant cannot be retried for the offence under the Double Jeopardy law. Double jeopardy is an ancient common law principle that protects individuals from being tried more than once for the same offence. It was traditionally restricted to criminal proceedings to shield a defendant from repeated attempts at conviction by the all-powerful state, as a matter of fairness. However, the judiciary and legislature have struggled to