LegalQuestions
Junior Member
Hi all. I need some clarification and maybe even some points on this issue.
My GF and her family lives in Houston, TX. In 2000, her dad went into clinical depression. In 09/2004, several homes in the area were burned down, and the police were questioning people. Since my GF_s dad was suffering from clinical depression he wasn_t answering questions properly which led the police to believe he might be the arsonist. They asked him to come down to the police station voluntarily and the police ended up questioning him for more then 7 hours (without giving him a break and letting him speak to a lawyer or family members). They put so much pressure on him that he admitted to everything. The police did not know he was diagnosed with clinical depression. They locked him for several months while the courts set up a trail date for early 2005. In court the jury found him innocent because the police had NO evidence other then the forced admission by interrogation.
Her dad_s condition is even worse now because of what the police did. Their court appointed lawyer wants to have the courts pay for the medical treatment so he wants to re-open the case. Now, my GF is worried if they go back to trail then her dad will (1) have to go through all this again, which can make his condition even worse, and (2) what if the courts or the jury finds him guilty of that arson crime. I told her about _double jeopardy_ where her dad can_t be tried for the same crime twice. From my understanding, _double jeopardy_ means if the person went to trial and was found innocent, they cannot be tried again for that same crime again, is that correct? If not, then does it mean if her court appointed lawyer tries to re-open the case then her dad can be tried again, and face jail time? What would be the reason for trying to re-open the case?
My GF and her family lives in Houston, TX. In 2000, her dad went into clinical depression. In 09/2004, several homes in the area were burned down, and the police were questioning people. Since my GF_s dad was suffering from clinical depression he wasn_t answering questions properly which led the police to believe he might be the arsonist. They asked him to come down to the police station voluntarily and the police ended up questioning him for more then 7 hours (without giving him a break and letting him speak to a lawyer or family members). They put so much pressure on him that he admitted to everything. The police did not know he was diagnosed with clinical depression. They locked him for several months while the courts set up a trail date for early 2005. In court the jury found him innocent because the police had NO evidence other then the forced admission by interrogation.
Her dad_s condition is even worse now because of what the police did. Their court appointed lawyer wants to have the courts pay for the medical treatment so he wants to re-open the case. Now, my GF is worried if they go back to trail then her dad will (1) have to go through all this again, which can make his condition even worse, and (2) what if the courts or the jury finds him guilty of that arson crime. I told her about _double jeopardy_ where her dad can_t be tried for the same crime twice. From my understanding, _double jeopardy_ means if the person went to trial and was found innocent, they cannot be tried again for that same crime again, is that correct? If not, then does it mean if her court appointed lawyer tries to re-open the case then her dad can be tried again, and face jail time? What would be the reason for trying to re-open the case?
Last edited: