Reading in this more, I've got to ask, how the fuck did Anglos come up with this shit?
So basically, in Canada double jeopardy only applies after a person is convicted or acquitted the first time in court. I've already mentioned this above but I'll elaborate on what happens if a person is acquitted. In that case, the prosecution can appeal for... some reason. When it reaches the appeals court they can do one of two things, either uphold the acquittal or throw out the results of the trial and order a new one be conducted.
Here's how this is biased in favor of the prosecution: the Crown (anagulous to 'the State' in a US context, i believe) needs to prove that an "error of law" was committed during the trial, and they need to prove that this error directly influenced the verdict. If the appeallate court doesn't feel that this is the case, the results of the trial are thrown out and they order a new trial. The defendant also loses his double jeopardy right since that right is directly tied to the verdict from the first trial.
In 1986, Guy Paul Morin was put on trial for allegedly raping and murdering his 9 year old neighbor. He was found innocent in this trial... and then the prosecution appealed. All the way up to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court approved the prosecution's appeal and ordered a new trial, and after six years of making his own appeals, Morin was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment in 1992. He was released in 1995 after DNA evidence emerged that proved (again) he was innocent the whole time.
This is the sort of fuckery that occurs when you let C*n*dians manage your legal system. Feel thankful, reader, that you (most likely) are American or at the very least not a fucking Canadian.
archive.md
