Is justice really blind?

[btc78]

It’s almost impossible for someone to be found guilty of murder without finding the body but if with enough circumstantial evidence then the defendant could be found guilty

I’m not a lawyer nor i know anything much about the law but there’s a lot of cases where defendants are falsely accused yet they still serve time even if the crime wasn’t really done but this time around, it is clear that she had killed him so she will serve again but maybe with a lesser sentence

[yazher]

It’s almost impossible for someone to be found guilty of murder without finding the body but if with enough circumstantial evidence then the defendant could be found guilty

I’m not a lawyer nor i know anything much about the law but there’s a lot of cases where defendants are falsely accused yet they still serve time even if the crime wasn’t really done but this time around, it is clear that she had killed him so she will serve again but maybe with a lesser sentence

Mostly this happens in some corrupt countries where people without connections are considered nothing in the eyes of the government and once they are proven not to have anything to defend their cases, they will automatically face the consequences. In our country, many people have become victims of this kind of behavior by policemen, when they want to be promoted, they will simply choose random guys and arrest them, putting them in a situation where they cannot ask for any help. That's why all around the world, people are losing interest in trusting the police because many of them are still unfair.

[rahim066]

lawyers can use her mental health to get her a good deal
coz living with (- he husband disappereance and geting acused to murder him not knowing if is actually dead or not - Finding out he was cheating on her and living with an other woman ) can really get ur mental health down

[Dunamisx]

lawyers can use her mental health to get her a good deal
coz living with (- he husband disappereance and geting acused to murder him not knowing if is actually dead or not - Finding out he was cheating on her and living with an other woman ) can really get ur mental health down

Let me tell you this vividly, there are some cases we may not just be the perfect solution provider to it because we are not there to witness the whole show, but there's a way we could use a spychology kind of approach on that, that is when the professionalism of a thing comes in here, whereby we make engagement of the use of the trained professionals in such field to assist judge the actual matter.

[Gozie51]

lawyers can use her mental health to get her a good deal
coz living with (- he husband disappereance and geting acused to murder him not knowing if is actually dead or not - Finding out he was cheating on her and living with an other woman ) can really get ur mental health down

I think I understand a little bit of the angle that you are going to, probably that she was mentally derailed at the time she shot the husband but to that effect, they will examine her on her mental health before the shooting, at the time of shooting and would put her on close examination to assertain if she is okay or not and most likely they would find out she is fine.

But I think that the lawyers would just plead that she has been jailed for the same offense and she has served it out. I don't think it be out of reason to plead that.

[God bless u]

It’s almost impossible for someone to be found guilty of murder without finding the body but if with enough circumstantial evidence then the defendant could be found guilty

I’m not a lawyer nor i know anything much about the law but there’s a lot of cases where defendants are falsely accused yet they still serve time even if the crime wasn’t really done but this time around, it is clear that she had killed him so she will serve again but maybe with a lesser sentence

Actually, justice is not blind, because justice is what we have to do on the basis of evidence. They judge what they have, that is, how do we judge them? We judge them on the basis of evidence.

If someone has committed a crime, we have the evidence against him, then we can punish him according to what he has, but it is wrong to say that justice is blind, blind only on this basis of no availability of proof. But justice is given to the one with evidence.

[God bless u]

In America, you can't be tried for the same crime twice.

In fact, the rules of some countries are very strict, that is, they follow their rules in such a way that even the citizens of their own country cannot imagine any mistake and the people of foreign countries are limited to itself they can't do it,they don't even give anyone a chance to make a mistake, that is, their rules and regulations are going in the right direction on such a wide scale.

There are such countries where no body can twice a mistake or repeat, they also provide a lot of security to their citizens and what is more, there is a lot of facilities

[Dunamisx]

    Friends let's do small judiciary work and legal advice this morning. A woman was accused of killing her husband, his body was never found and she was sentenced. Years after serving her jail term, she found out the man is living with another woman.

   She went and shot the man several times and he died for real this time around and she was re-arrested for the same murder on the same person.

As a judge what will you do ?
will you address the case as a fresh murder or will you consider it as a crime she already served the term? 
                         
 lawyers, your opinion is needed. Over to you

The first situation was the the judge that made the first court case was unfair, he wouldn't have done that without having any evidence against the the woman for the man's obituary, secondly, the woman has an unforgiven spirit, she would have left the man alone after discovering that he's alive, what should have been done is to sue the man and the judge back to court, then killing the man was the greatest offense of it all, because this time, she can't escape it neither.

[Y3shot]

In America, you can't be tried for the same crime twice.

In fact, the rules of some countries are very strict, that is, they follow their rules in such a way that even the citizens of their own country cannot imagine any mistake and the people of foreign countries are limited to itself they can't do it,they don't even give anyone a chance to make a mistake, that is, their rules and regulations are going in the right direction on such a wide scale.

There are such countries where no body can twice a mistake or repeat, they also provide a lot of security to their citizens and what is more, there is a lot of facilities

The time she spent in the jail for not committing the crime she was accused of would have been a reason for her not to commit a crime because this time it will be heavy on her because their is evidence to prove that the crime was committed. I think before she was accused af first it seems people already know this is a crime that she can committ. This time around she will serve the judgment for committing crime, and judgment won't compromise because she was innocent in the first accusation.

[Gozie51]

The time she spent in the jail for not committing the crime she was accused of would have been a reason for her not to commit a crime because this time it will be heavy on her because their is evidence to prove that the crime was committed. I think before she was accused af first it seems people already know this is a crime that she can committ. This time around she will serve the judgment for committing crime, and judgment won't compromise because she was innocent in the first accusation.

It is not enough to assume and believe that the woman is capable of committing the crime or that people are thinking that way. She could be a prime suspect either because she is not in good terms with the husband and usually prime suspects are usually traced in such way where they are perceived as enemy and so you can also see that the assumption is wrong in the first instance where this woman was adjudged to be the committal of the murder until she had to do the real offense, so I don't think she will be imprisoned for the second time since she committed an offence once.

[Miles2006]

    Friends let's do small judiciary work and legal advice this morning. A woman was accused of killing her husband, his body was never found and she was sentenced. Years after serving her jail term, she found out the man is living with another woman.

   She went and shot the man several times and he died for real this time around and she was re-arrested for the same murder on the same person.

As a judge what will you do ?
will you address the case as a fresh murder or will you consider it as a crime she already served the term? 
                         
 lawyers, your opinion is needed. Over to you

If this story is real and the lady got arrested without any evidence shows there's something fishy, it can be as a form of conspiracy and who knows if the judge took a bribe.
In a situations like this the judge should be held responsible for any action the lady took and the judge should answer some certain questions concerning the first case, if this case appeared to be real the lawyer who took the case against the lady should be questioned too, I believe there's some behind this story but since things are done hidden no one can question. I will go with the opinion for a rearrest cause in our society we should not fight with our power but rather always report to the law officials, have seen several situations when people get arrested for what they no know about just because they made a bad decision and acted  according to their will, in this situation the lady had a second chance to prove her guiltiness but she used her power to fight back so she should be arrested.

[Dunamisx]

Justice isn't blind, we are the ones that e refused to apply it where appropriately needed, you can't expect people doing wrongs and yet they are expecting things to work out for them as being vindicated, we cannot blame some people for what they ha e done if not that we were once in that same shoe, the woman was firstly accused but later proved it that they were right of what she has been accused of.

[Obim34]

Justice isn't blind, we are the ones that e refused to apply it where appropriately needed, you can't expect people doing wrongs and yet they are expecting things to work out for them as being vindicated, we cannot blame some people for what they ha e done if not that we were once in that same shoe, the woman was firstly accused but later proved it that they were right of what she has been accused of.

It will be much better putting oneself in same shoes of the lady, who knows how long she might have served for something which she did not do. If i should say the man deserves putting a hole on his head then it makes me look like I'm in support of the woman but the man fucked up full time. You mean he never knew the woman was in prison as being accused of killing him, in a little way he deserves to be punished but maybe not with death sentence as what the woman did, she allowed her anger took over her. So, I think she will serve as per committing the crime, if at all she did not kill him then she would have been compasated for the time spent in prison.

[Spaceman1000$]

   Friends let's do small judiciary work and legal advice this morning. A woman was accused of killing her husband, his body was never found and she was sentenced. Years after serving her jail term, she found out the man is living with another woman.

   She went and shot the man several times and he died for real this time around and she was re-arrested for the same murder on the same person.

As a judge what will you do ?
will you address the case as a fresh murder or will you consider it as a crime she already served the term?  
                        
 lawyers, your opinion is needed. Over to you

The first question to this case is that, if she was wrongly accused for killing the man and she has served her jail term and come back, and it was later found out that the man was not dead, it then means she will be compensated by the judicial authority or the government for wrong accusation and haven't serve a jail term she's not supposed to, however if that case is settled on the compensation side on wrong accusation, then another case is going to be opened on the fact that the man wasn't dead and she went ahead in killing the man in real time, it is a fresh case all together, because it is believed that the first case has been settled and compensations have been made.

[Kliss]

Nothing, is worth taking the life  of another. No matter the misdeed, immorality wickedness and sin committed against one,. To me she had an opportunity to justify her self from the previous one and justice would have caught up with him. But repeating the same crime that she  was convicted for is not good for her  she could have prosecuted him and the authorities for not properly investigating into the case before conclusion. But if her lawyers are good, she can get reduced sentence.

Justice is not blind, rather it can be compromised by the Elite, those in power and authority.

[Promocodeudo]

    Friends let's do small judiciary work and legal advice this morning. A woman was accused of killing her husband, his body was never found and she was sentenced. Years after serving her jail term, she found out the man is living with another woman.

   She went and shot the man several times and he died for real this time around and she was re-arrested for the same murder on the same person.

As a judge what will you do ?
will you address the case as a fresh murder or will you consider it as a crime she already served the term? 
                         
 lawyers, your opinion is needed. Over to you

OP, this sound like a fiction to me, how can can a competent court of jurisdiction sentence someone without a good evidence, the corpse was not seen, so what's the evidence of their claim that the woman in question committed the crime, I don't think that such is obtainable anywhere.
The woman having knowledge that the man is living with another woman else where and deciding to go their to shoot him severally, to me am not an attorney but crime is crime, no matter the emotion involve, since you commit a crime you will go in for it, this is my take on this matte.

[oktana]

As a judge what will you do ?
will you address the case as a fresh murder or will you consider it as a crime she already served the term? 
                         
 lawyers, your opinion is needed. Over to you

As a judge, you have to do the right thing, which is arresting and sentencing the woman to jail. As the judge I may be considerate as per her previous sentence and reduce the time a little but she must be put to jail because even if she was first wrongly sentenced, she went on and committed a crime (the crime). Two wrongs don’t make a right. So, fresh case for me.

[Mehedi72]

It seems interesting along with weird case. Firstly, judge shouldn't have given his judgement without any solid evidence. Don't know how a judge can punish a person base on ideas or guesses. Besides I don't have knowledge what should a judge do according to law. But if i were a judge, as i already declared that woman gulity and that's why she already served her jail term, then I'll consider her punishment after she rearrested. Maybe some years of jail! I would punish her again, otherwise other people would do same crime when they would notice a judge release a real criminal without any punishment

[Gozie51]

But if i were a judge, as i already declared that woman gulity and that's why she already served her jail term, then I'll consider her punishment after she rearrested. Maybe some years of jail! I would punish her again, otherwise other people would do same crime when they would notice a judge release a real criminal without any punishment

Lol but as a judge you have to make judgement that is not repugnant to natural justice and ultra vires. Despite being a judge, you still have to fall back to the books of law guiding humanity and your jurisdiction.

The question is, is it right for someone to be punished twice for one and the same crime? I think the answer is no. Therefore, would you now come back again to punish the woman after she was out of jail to put her back in there?, because you want to wade off other potential committals. The law is not made for a single person but for the whole of the people in the jurisdiction.

[encryptogon]

    Friends let's do small judiciary work and legal advice this morning. A woman was accused of killing her husband, his body was never found and she was sentenced. Years after serving her jail term, she found out the man is living with another woman.

   She went and shot the man several times and he died for real this time around and she was re-arrested for the same murder on the same person.

As a judge what will you do ?
will you address the case as a fresh murder or will you consider it as a crime she already served the term? 
                         
 lawyers, your opinion is needed. Over to you

I am no lawyer, but I think the Judge should set her free. She already served her term in jail for the same crime. This comes under Double jeopardy. You can read further by following the given links.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/double_jeopardy
http://fra.europa.eu/en/eu-charter/article/50-right-not-be-tried-or-punished-twice-criminal-proceedings-same-criminal