In U.K., Double Jeopardy's in Jeopardy

Aug. 1 -- Julie Hogg, a 22-year-old pizza deliverywoman from northern England, was killed in 1989. Billy Dunlop admits he strangled her. But there's absolutely nothing police can do about it.

That's because Dunlop didn't confess until after he had been tried twice and finally acquitted in the case. He was sentenced to six years in prison for perjury, but because of double jeopardy protections, he can't be tried again for Hogg's murder.

That might be about to change.

British Home Secretary David Blunkett recently released a proposed revamping of the legal system that would, among other things, do away with some jury trials, allow hearsay evidence in some instances, and give judges the possibility of revealing a defendant's past record.

It would also scrap the double jeopardy rule in certain serious cases — such as murder, rape and armed robbery — when new evidence surfaced. This would be retroactive, meaning that defendants who had been acquitted could be brought in to book again.

‘Justice for Everyone’?

Blunkett's proposals, contained in a paper called "Justice for Everyone," still have to be turned into a draft bill and then lodged in both houses of Parliament before they could become law. Nevertheless, the proposals are sparking controversy, not only in the United Kingdom, but also in the United States, whose legal system owes a lot to English law.

In the United States, double jeopardy protection — which says an acquitted defendant cannot be retried for the same offense in the same jurisdiction — is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.

"There is a reason for the double jeopardy clause," said Paul Marcus, a law professor at the College of William and Mary in Virginia. "It's a check against the government."

Without the double jeopardy protection, government prosecutors could continue trying a defendant until they got the verdict they wanted, Marcus said.

"Our Bill of Rights takes the position it is not just to convict the guilty, but to convict the guilty in a fair and equitable way," said Marcus.

‘Growing Fear’ of Crime

In Britain, however, a lot of people are more concerned about stemming the crime rate than protecting the rights of the accused.