Category Archives: Government
Double jeopardy prohibits different prosecutions for the same offense. This rule can come into play when a government brings a charge against someone for an incident, then prosecutes that person again for the same incident, only with a different charge.
For example, if a defendant is found not guilty of manslaughter in a drunk-driving incident, he or she cannot be tried again in criminal court. However, the deceased victim’s family is free to sue the defendant for wrongful death in a civil court to recover financial damages.
A situation of double jeopardy could possibly be invoked when an authority brings a charge against an electricity supplier for harmful combustion of fossil fuels. Improper waste disposal is an environmental crime and could be heard in a criminal court. If they are found not guilty, they cannot be tried again in the criminal court for the same incident with a different charge, for example pollution, However, the plaintiff is free to sue them in a civil court for wrongful polluting of air.
A defendant could maintain that non-renewable fuel combustion cannot be both polluting and resource – diminishing at the same time, for when that resource is not renewed, it cannot also cause pollution. The prosecutor cannot have a resource cake with pollution eating it at the same time.
The double jeopardy principle prevents courts contradicting each other.
Although the example situation above could not be dealt with by existing legislation, it could be a guide to fair treatment of alleged polluters from non-renewable resources. Resource depletion should be tested legally separately from alleged pollution.
The situation is notionally relevant to prosecution of fossil fuel compliance when neither pollution nor depletion have corroborating scientific evidence in Australia. A shifted climate science paradigm is explained in the novel Animal Farm 2.
Jane Kenwood is a feisty independent on a city council rife with skulduggery. When there is to be a vote on a casino project that she has been outspoken in opposing in a hung parliament, she disappears mysteriously.
Dr Phillip Keane, her partner, is a forensic scientist and sets up a think tank of her friends to investigate, with help from the police. The story has forensic science to savour and reveals corruption in partisan politics that disable governments.
The friends search systematically and find evidence of causal links between the perpetrators’ motives, suspects’ characteristics, crime scenes and the victim’s condition. Hypotheses reconstructing the heinous crime are related by an Euler walk, a theory of the crime able to convict, keeping you guessing until the dramatic final dénouement.
Dealing with Covid 19 particles has interaction and uncertainty, with a hope of overcoming them through technological skill, population commitment and good leadership.
VIRUS PARTICLE MOVES POSSIBLE
Dormant; Contact transmission; Surface transmission; Vector transmission; Infection; Reproduction; Virility increase; New variant; Deactivated
HUMAN MOVES POSSIBLE
Travel restriction; International borders closed; State borders closed; District borders closed; Quarantined entry; Self-Isolation; Public transport restricted; Private transport restricted; Event crowd restriction; Restriction of gatherings in public spaces; Social distancing in public spaces; Restriction of custom in restaurants, businesses; Home gatherings restriction; Closure of businesses; Closure of schools; Compulsory masking; Cleaning; Sterilisation; Wearing PPE; Compulsory testing; Contact tracing; Vaccination; Immune System Strengthening.
HOW TO PLAY
Human purpose of play is to prevent infection by virus particles. The virus purpose could be to reproduce and infect humans. An infection could result from one, or very many, virus particles. Human moves can oppose virus particles movement. Because there are many virus particles and they are small, human defence can counter applying many technologies simultaneously. Because virus particles are small, elimination of virus particles cannot be observed. Implementing many technologies can disrupt social and economic living. Alternatively, humans can decline to defend and accept casualties. The consequences of inaction are not known.
Reduction of deaths and hospitalisations to pre-pandemic rates is sought, indicated by decline in number of positive tests to zero.
Opposition to an almost invisible enemy requires an objective response based on testing, contact tracing and diagnosis. Controlled tests are required to detect its presence and prevent spreading. Preventive cautionary moves require sound objective reasoning to show benefits that surpass the value of costs to the community. In default of reason, allowing the disease to run its course should be considered.
40 of my previous Covid posts are on my blog: martinknox.com