NHD Discussion

 Double Jeopardy is a law that was put in place in the 5th Amendment to the Constitution of the U.S. It basically says that someone can't be charged by the same level of court more than once. Over the years, mostly recently, there has been anger built up over this law that people have "gone free" due to this law. The media has pointed out this law as the culprit but without giving the whole story as to what the law does. What I am doing is clearing the air as to what this law does, how it protects citizens, and how it is justified. It IS a legitimate law. It SHOULD still be practiced and protects the rights of American people contrary to popular belief.



My topic pertains to Double Jeopardy and has a particular interest today in the light of certain cases that have upset the public with the verdict. Much of the upset (stirred up by the media) has been directed towards this law. I am analyzing the arguments presented by the media and by experts to justify the law and also underline when and why the law came about. I'm expressing an argument of mine with substantial evidence that gives insight to both of the arguments. So far, I have encountered several sources that express outrage but each of these are news outlets telling of controversial cases. This hints that perhaps some media outlets are searching for something to blame. Double Jeopardy is the target though it has legitimate use in today's and yesterday's society.

Thesis: Double Jeopardy is a legitimate law that bars a citizen from enduring trial more than once for substantially the same crime. It has encountered much trouble in recent years though it has been in use for much more. Many people believe it is unjust or even not needed, but it has a considerable impact upon the legal system and is imperative to today's court.