# Killer Confesses Afer "not guilty" **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 9, 2006, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903 "2006-04-09T00:39:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![cwthree](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9de0a6/32.png) [@cwthree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cwthree)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/21 "2006-04-09T15:26:24Z")
> [@Otto](#): > > Can’t charge him again for the killing. Once he’s acquitted, he can never be charged for the killing again on the state level. If he took the stand during the trial and said he didn’t kill the person, he could be charged with perjury. Depending on the jurisdiction, he could go away for a long time for that. > > Federally, he’d have to be charged with some federal law. For instance, the cops who beat Rodney King were acquitted of the state charges but were later convicted of federal charges for depriving King of his civil rights by beating him. I thought that under some circumstances someone could be re-tried if there was new evidence that didn’t exist at the time of the first trial. Convictions have been overturned when new evidence (e.g., DNA analysis) became available. Wouldn’t the confession count as new evidence? ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/22 "2006-04-09T15:38:56Z")
> [@cwthree](#): > > I thought that under some circumstances someone could be re-tried if there was new evidence that didn’t exist at the time of the first trial. Convictions have been overturned when new evidence (e.g., DNA analysis) became available. Wouldn’t the confession count as new evidence? It doesn’t work the other way. A conviction may be overturned if a new trial is granted. But only the defendant can request a new trial. The prosecution only gets one bite at the apple. If you are found not guilty the prosecution cannot bring the charges again. The one exception I recall is a corrupt judge who took a pay off. SCOTUS granted the prosecution a new trial. Their reasoning was that since the judge had been paid off the defendant was never really in jepordy. ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/23 "2006-04-09T15:39:38Z")
> [@cwthree](#): > > I thought that under some circumstances someone could be re-tried if there was new evidence that didn’t exist at the time of the first trial. Convictions have been overturned when new evidence (e.g., DNA analysis) became available. Wouldn’t the confession count as new evidence? Acquittal stands as an absolute bar to re-trial for the same crime. If A is tried for murdering B, is acquitted, and the day after the verdict the police discover the murder weapon with B’s blood and A’s fingerprints, a signed, dated confession from A and a videotape of A committing the murder, A still goes free for the murder. The prosecution gets one bite at the apple. There is no appeal of a Not Guilty verdict. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/24 "2006-04-09T15:40:20Z")
> [@Cliffy](#): > > This is correct, but it’s not the whole story. In addition, a plea of “not guilty” is not any kind of statement of fact. It’s merely the way to say “Prove it.” I would say it’s the way of saying “I am not guilty of the crime of which I am being accused”, e.g. I’m on trial for murder - not guilty could mean “sure I killed the guy, but it wasn’t murder, it was self-defense”. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Slant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c57346/32.png) [@Mr.Slant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Slant)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/25 "2006-04-09T15:52:31Z")
> [@cwthree](#): > > I thought that under some circumstances someone could be re-tried if there was new evidence that didn’t exist at the time of the first trial. Convictions have been overturned when new evidence (e.g., DNA analysis) became available. Wouldn’t the confession count as new evidence? Sure, it would be new evidence. Post-acquittall new evidence only helps a convicted defendant. The state can’t retry you even if the US President, the entire Supreme Court and Chuck Norris go to the DA and tell him they saw you do it. Of course, the US President could send you to Gitmo and Chuck Norris would roundhouse kick you to death before you could commit the murder, but we’ll leave those realities out of the case. Actually, if the entire Supreme Court witnessed a crime, could they testify? I assume they could. What would happen if you appealed to the Supreme Court? Would they all have to recuse themselves? Who would hear the case? ---
**Author:** ![ajax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a87d85/32.png) [@ajax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ajax)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/26 "2006-04-09T16:40:46Z")
[Mel Ignatow](http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2001/12/02/loc_killer_faces_new.html) ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/27 "2006-04-09T17:20:19Z")
> [@ajax](#): > > [Mel Ignatow](http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2001/12/02/loc_killer_faces_new.html) What about Mel? I realize you are a person of few words, but in this case I think you need to elaborate a bit more. ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/28 "2006-04-09T21:15:23Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > What about Mel? Ignatow was charged with mudering his fiancee and found not guilty. A year after the acquittal, new evidence was found, including photgraphs of the murder. Ignatow subsequently admitted to the crime. He was charged with perjury for lying to the FBI during their investigation, and served five years. The crime took place in Kentucky, and the original trial was circa 1991. ---
**Author:** ![Mayo\_Speaks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c57346/32.png) [@Mayo\_Speaks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mayo_Speaks)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/29 "2006-04-09T22:06:12Z")
(bolding mine) > [@Mr. Slant](#): > > Sure, it would be new evidence. > Post-acquittall new evidence only helps a convicted defendant. The state can’t retry you even if the US President, the entire Supreme Court and **Chuck Norris** go to the DA and tell him they saw you do it. Of course, the US President could send you to Gitmo and Chuck Norris would roundhouse kick you to death before you could commit the murder, but we’ll leave those realities out of the case. > Actually, if the entire Supreme Court witnessed a crime, could they testify? > I assume they could. > What would happen if you appealed to the Supreme Court? Would they all have to recuse themselves? Who would hear the case? Don’t fuck with Chuck! ---
**Author:** ![askeptic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@askeptic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/askeptic)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/30 "2006-04-09T22:20:31Z")
> [@anson2995](#): > > Ignatow was charged with mudering his fiancee and found not guilty. A year after the acquittal, new evidence was found, including photgraphs of the murder. Ignatow subsequently admitted to the crime. He was charged with perjury for lying to the FBI during their investigation, and served five years. > > The crime took place in Kentucky, and the original trial was circa 1991. Yeah. I knew all that. And if I didn’t the link I quoted had all that information in it. What I was asking, since the Ignatow case simply illustrates what I and others have been saying in this thread, is what possible relevance did it have to the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Tess\_of\_the\_Derbyville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8dc957/32.png) [@Tess\_of\_the\_Derbyville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tess_of_the_Derbyville)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/31 "2006-04-09T22:27:50Z")
Here is a [book](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0380721929/sr=8-3/qid=1144620686/ref=pd_bbs_3/002-4368750-5635258?%5Fencoding=UTF8) about the Ignatow case. It tells the whole sad story in horrifying detail. ---
**Author:** ![JimOfAllTrades](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@JimOfAllTrades](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JimOfAllTrades)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2006, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/32 "2006-04-09T23:24:07Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The federal civil rights charges pressed against the Rodney King cops can only be applied if the defendant committed the crime while acting under some kind of government authority. I’m no expert, and maybe this doesn’t apply, but I recall a case that seems to contradict this. In the early 1980s, in Salt Lake City, Utah, a white man shot two black men who were jogging through a local park. It was big news at the time, and a topic for discussion in my family as my parents lived only a couple of blocks from the park. I don’t recall the particulars of why, but he was first charged in federal court of violating the civil rights of the two men he killed. Later, he was charged in state court for murder (and I think convicted in both courts). A little googling brings me the man’s name: Joseph Paul Franklin. Maybe some of our legally knowledgeable dopers can comment on restrictions on charging a person in federal court with violating someone’s civil rights? ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/33 "2006-04-10T10:37:01Z")
> [@ZeroZero](#): > > Realistically, if a guy kills someone and let’s say is found not guilty of first degree murder, what would happen if he later said “Yeah I did it” > > … > > I find it hard to accept they would let someone off scott free, like they do in the movies. The murderers of [Emmett Till](http://afroamhistory.about.com/od/emmetttill/a/emmetttill.htm) did exactly that, and were never charged with anything ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/34 "2006-04-10T13:53:29Z")
> [@askeptic](#): > > Yeah. I knew all that. And if I didn’t the link I quoted had all that information in it. What I was asking, since the Ignatow case simply illustrates what I and others have been saying in this thread, is what possible relevance did it have to the discussion. Um, well, it’s an actual example of the scenario posed by the OP. How is it not relevant? Also relevant is the [Harry Aleman case](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Aleman). He was acquitted of murder in 1977, but it was later discovered that he had bribed the judge to fix the trial. The Fedeal Appeals Court ruled that because the first trial was a sham, Aleman had never been in jeopardy in the first place, so a re-trial was allowed. This is the only exception to the double jeopardy rule in US law, and as far as I know, Aleman is the only person to whom it has been applied. ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/35 "2006-04-10T13:57:21Z")
Also, I believe that recent legislation in Great Britain has eliminated the concept of double jeopardy, allowing a retrial after acquittal in the UK if new evidence is uncovered. ---
**Author:** ![AFAIKnow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a6a055/32.png) [@AFAIKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AFAIKnow)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/36 "2006-04-10T17:10:28Z")
> [@anson2995](#): > > Also, I believe that recent legislation in Great Britain has eliminated the concept of double jeopardy, allowing a retrial after acquittal in the UK if new evidence is uncovered. Barbarians 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/37 "2006-04-10T18:33:38Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > I raised the question of jurisdiction earlier because I remember news reports of a double jeopardy case. Someone was retried in a different jurisdiction for a crime connected with the same overall act after having been acquitted in the original jurisdiction. I well remember thinking at that time that this double jeopardy thing isn’t nearly as cut-and-dried as I had thought. This can happen if the two jurisdictions are dual sovereigns, like state and federal governments, or two state governments. Say I stood in Texas and shot a guy in Okalahoma, and he dies an hour later in new Mexico. At common law, the cause of action against me arises in the place where the fatal force inpinges on the body, in this case Oklahoma. However, all three states are free to write statutes in which I would be guilty of murder in all three, and I could be tried by all three. The SCOTUS case on point is [Heath v. Alabama](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=474&invol=82), 474 U.S. 82 (1985). Heath hired two men to kill his wife, who was nine months pregnant; they kidnapped her in Alabama and killed her in Georgia. He pleaded guilty in Georgia in exchange for a life sentence. Alabama susequently indicted him for murder during a kidnapping, and he received the death penalty. The Court ruled that each state had the right to criminalize and exercise jurisdiction over Heath’s actions, and it didn’t violate double jeopardy for each to prosecute him for a single course of conduct. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/38 "2006-04-10T19:07:01Z")
> [@anson2995](#): > > Also, I believe that recent legislation in Great Britain has eliminated the concept of double jeopardy, allowing a retrial after acquittal in the UK if new evidence is uncovered. Here is an article: [BBC NEWS | UK | Double jeopardy law ushered out](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4406129.stm) ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/39 "2006-04-10T19:26:19Z")
> [@anson2995](#): > > Um, well, it’s an actual example of the scenario posed by the OP. How is it not relevant? > > Also relevant is the [Harry Aleman case](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Aleman). He was acquitted of murder in 1977, but it was later discovered that he had bribed the judge to fix the trial. The Fedeal Appeals Court ruled that because the first trial was a sham, Aleman had never been in jeopardy in the first place, so a re-trial was allowed. This is the only exception to the double jeopardy rule in US law, and as far as I know, Aleman is the only person to whom it has been applied. [Aleman v. Judges of Circuit Court](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=7th&navby=case&no=972479), 138 F.3d 302; 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 4034 (7th Cir. 1998). Petitions for rehearing and certiorari were denied. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2006, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903/40 "2006-04-10T19:27:07Z")
> [@RJKUgly](#): > > I’m no expert, and maybe this doesn’t apply, but I recall a case that seems to contradict this. > > In the early 1980s, in Salt Lake City, Utah, a white man shot two black men who were jogging through a local park. It was big news at the time, and a topic for discussion in my family as my parents lived only a couple of blocks from the park. > > I don’t recall the particulars of why, but he was first charged in federal court of violating the civil rights of the two men he killed. Later, he was charged in state court for murder (and I think convicted in both courts). > > A little googling brings me the man’s name: Joseph Paul Franklin. > > Maybe some of our legally knowledgeable dopers can comment on restrictions on charging a person in federal court with violating someone’s civil rights? That’s also the guy who shot Larry Flynt, I think. The police officers in the Rodney King case were tried under [18 USC § 242](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000242----000-.html), Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law. That particular statute does require a state actor. Franklin, on the other hand, was tried under the general criminal civil rights statute, [18 U.S.C. § 245](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000245----000-.html), Federally Protected Activities. Basically, the federal prosecutors claimed that Frankiln shot Urban League President Vernon Jordan to prevent him from using a public accomodation. It didn’t work, though, and Franklin was acquitted. He was later convicted on a civil rights violation for the shooting deaths of two black men, but I don’t know the particulars of that case. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/killer-confesses-afer-not-guilty/351903.md?page=3)