In Rare Move, Delegates Nix Double Jeopardy Bill In Final Vote
In a rare turn of events, a bill prohibiting double jeopardy prosecution in Maryland was defeated on third reading in the House of Delegates, 89 votes against to 46 in favor.
Sponsored by Del. Curt Anderson, D-Baltimore City, HB 152 sought to prohibit the state prosecution of a defendant who was acquitted in a federal court for the same crime.
Del. Jay Walker, D-Prince George’s, led the opposition to the bill during debate on the floor of the House, opening with a very direct question to the chair leader of the Judiciary Committee: “Why do we need this bill?” More
Many of these "representatives" are attorneys!! Who SHOULD know the law. The rest are people - I use that term loosely - who swore an oath (not that that means anything to them) to UPHOLD and defend the Constitution. They are failures. As 5:30 pointed out, double jeopardy is PROHIBITED by the Constitution. They are either stupid beyond description, or so pompously arrogant that they think this can be done by their mere desire. 48 (!) of them voted FOR it? When the cleaning starts (you know what I'm sayin'), start with them first. The sheep better start paying more attention.
Actually, I did look it up, and the bill was meant to prevent double jeopardy, so there are 89 who voted the bill down. The main reason stated was "Why do we need this Bill?", which is generally correct, as there is no reason to make a law parallel to the 5th since we already have the 5th. The fact that anyone thought this Bill needed to be introduced and discussed is what worries me.
So where is the rest of this story? Ask the question, who voted how? Answer? ANOTHER weak minded "journalist" who has an agenda and won't print the facts. Story incomplete journalist FAIL go back to waiting tables LOSER!
Yes, 10:04, we have had the 5th amendment in the Bill of Rights which came with the Constitution, Then Maryland signed up for that, and has never made a law regarding that otherwise; so, again, "Why do we need this Bill?"
Sorry, folks, double jeopardy is prohibited in the Constitution!
ReplyDeleteAmendment V.
Many of these "representatives" are attorneys!! Who SHOULD know the law. The rest are people - I use that term loosely - who swore an oath (not that that means anything to them) to UPHOLD and defend the Constitution. They are failures. As 5:30 pointed out, double jeopardy is PROHIBITED by the Constitution. They are either stupid beyond description, or so pompously arrogant that they think this can be done by their mere desire. 48 (!) of them voted FOR it? When the cleaning starts (you know what I'm sayin'), start with them first. The sheep better start paying more attention.
ReplyDeleteAmendment 5 is non-negotiable. The fact that 48 voted that it is negotiable tells us who to weed out next time around!
ReplyDeleteHB 152. Look up your house representatives and find out!
Actually, I did look it up, and the bill was meant to prevent double jeopardy, so there are 89 who voted the bill down. The main reason stated was "Why do we need this Bill?", which is generally correct, as there is no reason to make a law parallel to the 5th since we already have the 5th. The fact that anyone thought this Bill needed to be introduced and discussed is what worries me.
ReplyDeleteSo where is the rest of this story? Ask the question, who voted how? Answer? ANOTHER weak minded "journalist" who has an agenda and won't print the facts. Story incomplete journalist FAIL go back to waiting tables LOSER!
ReplyDeleteYes, We have the 5th ammendment; however, our government was structured so that state law supersedes federal law. Correct?
ReplyDeleteYes, 10:04, we have had the 5th amendment in the Bill of Rights which came with the Constitution, Then Maryland signed up for that, and has never made a law regarding that otherwise; so, again, "Why do we need this Bill?"
ReplyDelete