Skip to content

Erm, double jeopardy?

I know, I know, but:

David DePape, better known as the man who allegedly broke into the residence of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and violently attacked her husband Paul Pelosi, has pleaded not guilty to attempted murder and a San Francisco judge has set a trial date of Feb. 23, according to CBS News.

DePape has already pleaded guilty to federal assault and kidnapping charges. He has also been charged with assault with a deadly weapon, elder abuse, threats to a public official and residential burglary.

DePape is also facing charges from the Justice Department that includes attempting kidnapping of a federal official and assault on the immediate family member of a federal official.

There is this thing called double jeopardy. And I thought that part of it was only the one trial for any series of charges stemming from the one event.

Now, obviously, I’m wrong, so what is it that I was thinking of?

Sure, there’s a version of DJ where you can only be tried for the one murder the once. If found not guilty then that’s that (except in Britain post-Blair of course). But I did think that the concept went further than that. Thought it extended to “you can only be charged the once for the one episode”.

12 thoughts on “Erm, double jeopardy?”

  1. If you’re up against what the great Mark Steyn calls ‘the dirty, stinking, rotten, corrupt Federal justice system’ they routinely search the books and charge you with committing a dozen or so crimes with a combined sentence load of 200 years.

    Then they pressure you to admit to a couple of them to get a reduced sentence. This is why the Feds have a 99% conviction rate.

    Some of the Jan6 ‘insurrectionists’ pleaded guilty to parading, whatever that is. They’re still doing prison time though.

  2. It’s only Double Jeopardy if there’s a second trial after the first (whether the same offence or a different one from the same event).

    Unless there’s more that isn’t in your quote, this looks like it’s throwing lots of alternative charges at the same trial, which is pretty standard. Murder, manslaughter, GBH, ABH, wounding with intent, carrying an offensive weapon. OK, you don’t usually do the whole range, but two or three of them is pretty common; see how far the jury will go.

  3. One thing I’ve learned from my wife binge-watching true crime documentaries is that in the case of a serial killer, they’ll only try them for a dozen victims. If they lose (or if something goes wrong with the jury, or they make a procedural mistake) then they can get a new trial with a dozen more victims; and so on until they win.

  4. I’m the US, states are sovereign, not subordinate parts of the federal government.

    He’s being tried for crimes in overlapping jurisdictions by two separate court systems, not twice in the same one.

    ‘dual sovereignty’

    Having retired from the military and thus still subject to the UCMJ, I am under the thimb of *three* different courts.

  5. In addition, our system incentivized charging you with variations of your crime – murder 1, murder 2, manslaughter, etc – to help the jury find something to stick you with.

    And they also charge you with any number of low-probability side crimes to make your defense harder and make you plea out.

  6. The California based tv news bloke, who told the world that Pelosi let the police in, showed no signs of distress and actually walked towards DuPape, who was subsequently ‘put on gardening leave’ for a month or so after his report, has re-appeared. Doing the weather.

  7. Bloke in North Dorset

    The idea f doubly jeopardy suggested formed the story line for on of a series of short stories I’m reading from a German lawyer.

    Character gets pissed and decides to steal a drugs stash. Drug dealers see him and he jumps in to his car and speeds off. He crashes, kills one of the drugs dealers and does extensive damage. While on remand a lower court sends him letter telling him he’s been found guilty of DD and he doesn’t contest.

    At the end of the killing trial, in which he’s found guilty, this comes out and he has to be released because he’s already been charged and punished for one crime in the incident.

  8. Bloke in North Dorset

    I would have said the main aim was to find an incompetent court, but the more I read the more I realise how screwed the whole has become on Merkel’s watch.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *