I believe that any local-level crime (such as a county-level violation) would still be considered a state-level prosecution.
However, I am not a lawyer and do not know this for certain, nor do I have enough time at the moment to confirm that at the moment. That also largely prevents me from giving you a useful answer to your second question.
I'm not defending the practice or saying I understand the intricacies of it from a legal standpoint, as I do not work in the legal field. I only know that a state and federal charge can be leveled for the same crime from the same event without violating double jeopardy.
To be clear, though, I highly doubt the DOJ will be interested in keeping Rittenhouse in the news at this point. Even if the prosecution hadn't completely fucked up the case, I still find it unlikely they would have won based on the evidence that was presented in court. Unless there is some massive piece of evidence that both the prosecution and defense failed to address, I can't imagine a federal trial would have any reason to come to a different conclusion, and I cannot imagine why the DOJ would want to devote resources to what would likely be a losing case that, as you stated, is under significant accusation of being politically-tinted. Even if they win, they'd likely lose.
No problem. But as I added onto my post, I don't think you need to worry about Rittenhouse going back on trial. I can't imagine how it would be worth the resources for the DOJ to try prosecuting a case that was kind of embarrassing for a number of reasons. There's not much you can do with a gunshot victim that admitted Rittenhouse had a viable reason to shoot him in self-defense.
I think their opportunity to make an example of Mr. Rittenhouse has come and gone. Had the prosecution team been made up of competent lawyers who presented a good case, then we might see the DOJ looking to step in, but instead, they'd have to follow up a clown show, and I'm not certain how they could possibly benefit. Even assuming they're completely corrupt, there would have to be some sort of win to motivate them, and I can't figure out what sort of win is worth the risk they'd take. Rittenhouse isn't really that big of a fish.
I believe that any local-level crime (such as a county-level violation) would still be considered a state-level prosecution.
However, I am not a lawyer and do not know this for certain, nor do I have enough time at the moment to confirm that at the moment. That also largely prevents me from giving you a useful answer to your second question.
I'm not defending the practice or saying I understand the intricacies of it from a legal standpoint, as I do not work in the legal field. I only know that a state and federal charge can be leveled for the same crime from the same event without violating double jeopardy.
To be clear, though, I highly doubt the DOJ will be interested in keeping Rittenhouse in the news at this point. Even if the prosecution hadn't completely fucked up the case, I still find it unlikely they would have won based on the evidence that was presented in court. Unless there is some massive piece of evidence that both the prosecution and defense failed to address, I can't imagine a federal trial would have any reason to come to a different conclusion, and I cannot imagine why the DOJ would want to devote resources to what would likely be a losing case that, as you stated, is under significant accusation of being politically-tinted. Even if they win, they'd likely lose.
Okay thanks for your honest reply.
No problem. But as I added onto my post, I don't think you need to worry about Rittenhouse going back on trial. I can't imagine how it would be worth the resources for the DOJ to try prosecuting a case that was kind of embarrassing for a number of reasons. There's not much you can do with a gunshot victim that admitted Rittenhouse had a viable reason to shoot him in self-defense.
I agree
I think they want to do anything to drag him through the mud. And nothing grimier than federal mud.
I think their opportunity to make an example of Mr. Rittenhouse has come and gone. Had the prosecution team been made up of competent lawyers who presented a good case, then we might see the DOJ looking to step in, but instead, they'd have to follow up a clown show, and I'm not certain how they could possibly benefit. Even assuming they're completely corrupt, there would have to be some sort of win to motivate them, and I can't figure out what sort of win is worth the risk they'd take. Rittenhouse isn't really that big of a fish.