Comments on: A Year of Freedom for Tyler Edmonds

By: Aresen

Aresen — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:06:05 +0000

@ ParatrooperJJ | October 28th, 2009 at 10:28 am

Unfortunately, I think you’re right. I’m sure that the Great State of Mississippi will find some excuse.

If nothing else, somebody will do a sloppy internet search and see that he was charged with murder and ignore the acquittal.

TANJ.

By: ParatrooperJJ

ParatrooperJJ — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:28:24 +0000

Actually they can, most states have moral turpitude requirements for health care providers, it usually does not require a conviction.

By: JS

JS — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:50:42 +0000

Brilliant work Radley! What you do is so much more important than most people will ever realize.

By: KBCraig

KBCraig — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 06:17:48 +0000

I can only imagine the interesting job application process after this. In this day of computerized job screening, where keywords and checklists reject applicants before human eyes ever see the applications, some trickeration is probably required.

By: Sky

Sky — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:35:20 +0000

Thanks Radley…

I just wish there was enough on Hayne to build the guillotine he so richly deserves.

By: Frank

Frank — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:37:16 +0000

#13 Nope. He was acquitted. That’s the same as having never been arrested or charged. They can’t deny his EMT certification, or his paramedic once he passes the course.

By: Steve Clay

Steve Clay — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:34:02 +0000

This is an outrage! Fu… Oh, wow, faith in humanity being restored. Am I on the right blog?

By: supercat

supercat — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:50:15 +0000

Nando: Double-jeopardy would only apply if the person were ever out of jeopardy. Someone who is convicted at his first trial but wins a remand on appeal will remain continuously in jeopardy unless or until he is acquitted on the second trial. I don’t see any double-jeopardy issues at all with that.

More interesting cases arise in situations where in a single trial someone is found guilty of certain charges but not others. In some cases, it’s possible for the state to require that if the person wins a retrial for the charges on which he was convicted, he must also stand trial for others of which he was not. I think judges sometimes let the state go further than is really legitimate here, but there are some cases where such a thing makes sense. For example, if someone is tried and convicted for murder but the conviction is thrown out, they could be retried for manslaughter on the premise that the murder conviction was the only thing precluding the manslaughter conviction.

By: fwb

fwb — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:38:24 +0000

An how much in punitive damages has the state been forced to pay to this young man for screwing him over????

Yeah, right!!

The prosecutor, judge, and EVERYONE else involved should have to pay him for his loss.

Tiocfaidh ar la!

By: Michael Chaney

Michael Chaney — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:31:25 +0000

I could only give you one thumbs up…

See, livepodium *did* have its uses!

*duck & run

By: The Penal System

The Penal System — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:03:11 +0000

Win some, lose some. We’ll get him next time.

By: ParatrooperJJ

ParatrooperJJ — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:59:47 +0000

He will most likely still have trouble getting a license.

By: Aresen

Aresen — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:16:00 +0000

What Marty said.

+1000 for Radley.

By: Marty

Marty — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:12:37 +0000

#10- I could only give you one thumbs up, but in this case each thumb is worth 50…

By: Alex Knapp

Alex Knapp — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:03:26 +0000

Radley,

This is a life that you made better through your tireless efforts to discredit Dr. Hayne and for that, I salute you, sir.

By: de stijl

de stijl — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:53:31 +0000

I don’t suppose anybody ever bothered to find the real killer?

OJ Simpson would be looking into this, but he’s otherwise occupied currently.

By: Michael Chaney

Michael Chaney — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 19:15:53 +0000

I don’t suppose anybody ever bothered to find the real killer?

By: David

David — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:47:08 +0000

I’m impressed that Edmonds is building himself a life, and letting this go. If I were in his shoes, my all consuming obsession would be revenge on Steven Hayne, a man who’d was willing to ruin my life for a paycheck.

By: SusanK

SusanK — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:30:58 +0000

If you are tried once for a crime and the appeals court throws out the conviction for whatever irregularity occurred in the trial court, they will also look at the conviction to see if there was “sufficient evidence” to sustain a conviction. If they find that there was, the case is remanded for a new trial. If they find there wasn’t, then jeopardy attached and you can’t be retried. It’s a joke.

By: David

David — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:36:20 +0000

The idea is that he was never legitimately tried at all. They can’t go back in time and tell the jury to disregard Hayne’s testimony, so they hold a new trial that doesn’t include it.