Generally, however, prosecutors should have one bite at the apple, especially if that bite resulted in an overwhelming jury vote against him. A defendant should not have to defend himself multiple times on the same charge , since criminal trials are extremely taxing on the defendant in many different ways. One way is financially. While the government has unlimited resources to try a case over and over and over again, most defendants have limited resources that they exhaust at the first trial. They often have little left for a second trial.
Retrials also benefit the prosecution because they are able to prepare for the defendant’s themes, cross-examination, and other trial tactics.
The prosecution should not retry Andrew Gillum where the jury was deadlocked 10-2 in favor of acquittal. Gillum had the courage to proceed to trial. The prosecution took its best shot to convict him and lost. Not only did he beat back the false statement count, but it appears that the jury — a cross section of Northern Florida — overwhelmingly rejected the rest of the government’s case.
[As Dersh points out, Gillum refused a plea deal and ended up acquitted on the top count of lying to the FBI. Given that their case only convinced two of the twelve jurors on the remaining counts, it seems foolish to try the case again, although they certainly *can*, as Dersh acknowledges. It’s probably better to cut losses at this point, especially given the stakes involved. Gillum’s political career is dead anyway. — Ed]
Join the conversation as a VIP Member