Muslim Hijacker wants to return to America?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**azazel the cat**

Andrew1975 wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
Ahtman wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
The jurisdiction is irrelevant, as are the charges. It is only the criminal event that matters with the double jeopardy clause.

Almost nothing you just said is accurate. Jurisdiction matters, the charges matter, and it isn't only the criminal event that matters.

The charges do not matter. If you kill a single man, you cannot be tried for both murder and manslaughter (assuming the first trial ends in a situation that does not conclude jeopardy). However, this is quite different than if a person steals a car and then commits vehiclular homicide; as that is two separate events that can be tried seperately.

Likewise, the jurisdiction does not matter, unless the criminal event takes place in coinciding jurisdictions (which basically means state and federal) and even then, must pass the same evidence test. If you kill a man in Kentucky, you cannot be tried for it in both Kentucky, and then Tennesee, and then West Virginia, and so on (again, assuming the trial invokes jeopardy to begin with).

I'm not as confident in the federal-state interaction of this as I am with common law, but I'm reasonably certain this still applies.

The crime did take place in two jurisdictions though. US and Cuba. Cuba has prosecuted him, if he comes back, it's our turn.

Yeah, that's what I'm not sure about. I have no idea if the US would recognize another country's jurisprudence for the purposes of applying double jeopardy; I somehow doubt they would in this case especially.

**Breotan**

azazel the cat wrote:
Yeah, that's what I'm not sure about. I have no idea if the US would recognize another country's jurisprudence for the purposes of applying double jeopardy; I somehow doubt they would in this case especially.

No, double jeopardy as defined in the Constitution only applies to US criminal proceedings. It is possible a US court may take foreign prison time into account during sentencing but, barring some terms in the extradition deal, it is not obligated to. Being convicted in a foreign country does not prevent the US from going after you once you come home.

**d-usa**

Breotan wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
Yeah, that's what I'm not sure about. I have no idea if the US would recognize another country's jurisprudence for the purposes of applying double jeopardy; I somehow doubt they would in this case especially.
No, double jeopardy as defined in the Constitution only applies to US criminal proceedings. It is possible a US court may take foreign prison time into account during sentencing but, barring some terms in the extradition deal, it is not obligated to. Being convicted in a foreign country does not prevent the US from going after you once you come home.

If we also have jurisdiction of course.

If you do crack in Germany, get caught in Germany, get sentenced in Germany and then do your time in Germany; then you can't be expected to come back to the US and face the same drug charges again since the US has no ground to charge you there.

Thinks like hijackings originating from the US and/or on a US flagged plane have their own rules of course.

**Frazzled**

notprop wrote:
Its not about caring its about citizenship.

There was a case recently where a British born citizen emigrated to Australia aged 2. So effectively an Aussie.

He grew up and by time he was in his 50's was convicted of a string of child molestation offences. Upon release this toe rag was deported to the UK despite having no memory of living here or ties of any kind. I fear that the US would have no grounds to refuse entry to a US citizen if that is anything to go by.

The other thing is double jeopardy. If he has served 15 years for highjacking that plane can he be tried in the us for it?

Double jeopardy only applies for US punishment.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breotan wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
Yeah, that's what I'm not sure about. I have no idea if the US would recognize another country's jurisprudence for the purposes of applying double jeopardy; I somehow doubt they would in this case especially.
No, double jeopardy as defined in the Constitution only applies to US criminal proceedings. It is possible a US court may take foreign prison time into account during sentencing but, barring some terms in the extradition deal, it is not obligated to. Being convicted in a foreign country does not prevent the US from going after you once you come home.

Breotan has the way of it.

**KalashnikovMarine**

d-usa wrote:
Breotan wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
Yeah, that's what I'm not sure about. I have no idea if the US would recognize another country's jurisprudence for the purposes of applying double jeopardy; I somehow doubt they would in this case especially.
No, double jeopardy as defined in the Constitution only applies to US criminal proceedings. It is possible a US court may take foreign prison time into account during sentencing but, barring some terms in the extradition deal, it is not obligated to. Being convicted in a foreign country does not prevent the US from going after you once you come home.

If we also have jurisdiction of course.

If you do crack in Germany, get caught in Germany, get sentenced in Germany and then do your time in Germany; then you can't be expected to come back to the US and face the same drug charges again since the US has no ground to charge you there.

Thinks like hijackings originating from the US and/or on a US flagged plane have their own rules of course.

I think some military types have actually managed to end up with triple charges for actions over seas, charges from the host nation, the U.S. AND military courts

**Frazzled**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Breotan wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
Yeah, that's what I'm not sure about. I have no idea if the US would recognize another country's jurisprudence for the purposes of applying double jeopardy; I somehow doubt they would in this case especially.
No, double jeopardy as defined in the Constitution only applies to US criminal proceedings. It is possible a US court may take foreign prison time into account during sentencing but, barring some terms in the extradition deal, it is not obligated to. Being convicted in a foreign country does not prevent the US from going after you once you come home.

If we also have jurisdiction of course.

If you do crack in Germany, get caught in Germany, get sentenced in Germany and then do your time in Germany; then you can't be expected to come back to the US and face the same drug charges again since the US has no ground to charge you there.

Thinks like hijackings originating from the US and/or on a US flagged plane have their own rules of course.

I think some military types have actually managed to end up with triple charges for actions over seas, charges from the host nation, the U.S. AND military courts

A new variant to the term "triple threat" eh?