On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:32:51 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 09:27:09 -0700, Darren New wrote:
>> 
>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> The judge *could* declare a mistrial, but maybe not after the case
>>>> goes to the jury.
>>> I believe that's correct. Personally, I don't understand why they're
>>> allowed to call a mistrial in the *middle* of a trial for conduct of
>>> the prosecutors, myself, but I'm not a lawyer.  (Mistrial because the
>>> entire jury got hit by a bus or something, sure.)
>> 
>> I think because if the lawyers don't follow the rules, what they do
>> could mislead the jury.
> 
> Yeah. But then the lawyers could intentionally break the rules if they
> think they're losing, and get another chance. If the courtroom
> prosecution lawyer can't handle the rules, the suspect should go free,
> not stand trial again.
> 
> Maybe I wasn't clear. :-)
> 

Deliberate misconduct could get the case dismissed with prejudice. Beyond 
that, if it was a well covered case, the prosecutor could face charges of 
misconduct or contempt of court, and maybe even disbarment.

Chances are, a single prosecutor would only get away with that once.

Post a reply to this message