The movie thriller, "Double Jeopardy" gets the concept of double jeopardy completely wrong.  Here, I'll explain the basics of double jeopardy under the law and how the movie got it wrong.

The legal concept of double jeopardy comes from the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states:

The Double Jeopardy Clause prevents a criminal defendant from being tried more than once by the same sovereign for the same offense.

First, double jeopardy only applies if the defendant was either convicted (found guilty) or acquitted (found not guilty) after the first trial.

Second, it must be the same sovereign that is trying the defendant both times.  Each government entity is a separate sovereign.  The federal government is separate from the states, and each state is a separate sovereign from the others.  Also a Native American tribal government is separate from the federal government and states.

A true crime example of this was shown during the trials of the LAPD Officers who were accused of beating Rodney King.  The four officers were initially charged by the state of California (through the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office).  They were acquitted of the charges in state court.  The acquittals sparked the L.A. Riots.  The federal government then charged the four officers with civil rights violations based on the same incident.  This was not precluded by the Double Jeopardy Clause because the California and the federal government are two separate sovereigns.

The third requirement of double jeopardy is that the crimes charged in the first and second trials must be for the same offenses.  This is determined by the same elements test.  The elements of the crimes charged in the first and second cases are compared.  If there is an element that must be proven in each crime that is different from the other, than the crimes are not considered the same, and double jeopardy does not apply.

*SPOILER ALERT
In the movie "Double Jeopardy," a married couple spend a weekend sailing.  The wife, Libby (Ashley Judd), wakes up to find blood all over herself and the boat.  Her husband, Nick, is missing.  She arrested when the coast guard spots her holding a bloody knife, which she found on the deck.

Libby is convicted of Nick's murder.  Her best friend agrees to care for her four-year-old son while Libby is in prison.  While on the phone with her son, Libby hears a door open in the background, and her son yells, "Daddy."  The phone disconnects.

Libby suspects Nick faked his death and framed her for murder.  Another inmate advises Libby that when she was paroled, she could kill Nick with impunity because she had already been convicted of his murder, and the Double Jeopardy Clause would prevent her from being charged again.  Libby does just that.  (Tommy Lee Jones plays Libby's parole officer who at first investigates her violations of parole, then helps her once he realizes her story may be true.)

Lesson number one:  Never take legal advice from a fellow prison inmate - or a movie - without first checking with a lawyer.

Libby's fellow inmate, and this movie, get the concept of double jeopardy wrong.  If someone is wrongly convicted of murder, they do not then have free license to kill that person if the person is found alive.  

Although both charged crimes are for the murder of Nick, they are two separate incidents.  The dates, facts, and evidence supporting each charge would be completely different.  Therefore, the charges are not for the same offense.  

Also, in the movie, the first framed murder occurred in Washington state.  The second murder occurred in Louisiana.  Therefore, double jeopardy would not bar the second prosecution because the two states are not the same sovereign. 

Because she was falsely convicted the first time, she could probably sue and recover some money to compensate her for her time in prison, but she would not be able to use that first conviction as a defense for her the second (valid) charges.

Check out the movie by clicking below:

If you are a writer, get a free ebook revealing the Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery and Legal Drama.  For your first free consultation on your project, contact me.

The American Bar Association released a list of what its panel of judges has determined to be the 25 Greatest Law Novels Ever.  Here are a few of my favorites that also made their list:

To Kill A Mockingbrid by Harper Lee is one of my favorite all-time books - law or not.  And I'm certainly not alone.  Harper Lee won the Pulitzer Prize for this novel, and Gregory Peck won an Oscar for his protrayal of Atticus Finch in the movie version.  Atticus defends a black man accused of raping a white woman in depression-era Alabama.  This story has themes of race, class, and justice, but it is told through the eyes of a child.  If you haven't read it since high school (or maybe never did), it's worth another look. 

Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky is an fascinating psychological study in guilt.  The main character's increasing paranoia after committing murder is something that has stayed with me for years.

A Time to Kill by John Grisham is my favorite Grisham book.  This was his first book.  It is based on a real-life case.  The book is a story of race and revenge in the south with great characters.  The movie (starring Matthew McConaughey, Sandra Bullock, and Samuel L. Jackson is also excellent.

The Firm by John Grisham is not my favorite Grisham book (that award goes to A Time to Kill), but it's an exciting read.  A top graduate from Harvard Law School, Mitch McDeere is recruited to a high-paying job with great benefits.  He soon discovers that his new firm is a cover-up for serious criminal activity, and that his life and career are on the line.  The movie starring Tom Cruise is a faithful rendition of the book.

Presumed Innocent by Scott Turow is about a prosecutor accused of murdering his colleague/mistress.  This was Turow's first novel, and it's filled with political intrigue and legal maneuvering.  The movie starring Harrison Ford is a great rendition of the book.

The Stranger by Albert Camus revolves around the murder trial of Meursault. Meursault's lack of emotion is interpreted as a lack of remorse, and he is condemned to the guillotine.  But facing death, he finds himself oddly comforted by the simple fact of his own life.

And here are a few on my To-Read List:

Anatomy of a Murder by Robert Traver is based on a real life case.  A man kills his wife's rapist and claims the insanity defense at trial.  Robert Traver was the pen name of a Michigan Supreme Court Justice, John D. Voelker.  I've used the movie (starring James Stewart and directed by Otto Preminger) in my criminal law and procedure classes as a tool to teach the insanity defense.

Native Son by Richard Wright is also based on a true story.  It follows the life of Bigger Thomas, a young Chicago black man whose discomfort with whites drives him deeper and deeper into trouble for reasons he cannot seem to explain, and results in him being condemned to death for two murders.

And Honorable Mention goes to:

In Cold Blood by Truman Capote is a nonfiction true crime book written in the style of a novel.  It was one of the first to be written this way, and it remains one of the best.  For a great behid-the-scenes look at both this book and To Kill a Mockingbird (above), check out the movie Capote.   Philip Seymour Hoffman won an Oscar for his prtrayal of the author.

Do you agree or disagree with these choices?  Let me know!

If you are a writer, check out my free writer's guide revealing the Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery and Legal Drama.

The full name of the book is a mouthful:  "Wanted:  Gentleman Bank Robber:  The True Story of Leslie Ibsen Rogge, One of the FBI's Most Elusive Criminals."   The author is Dane Batty.  In the Introduction, you learn that Batty is the subject's nephew.   As you read further, it quickly becomes apparent that Leslie Rogge is the true author.

This is not your typical true crime book.  The stories are told largely in the first person by the Gentleman Bank Robber himself.  Most of the book is a compilation of Rogge's letters from prison.  This makes for an intimate and unique read.  There were times I wished other perspectives or more background information was included, but overall this was an interesting read.

The book reads like a how-to for robbing banks, stealing cars, and living on the run.  Rogge seems to take pride and glee in his robberies.  There are lessons on starting a car with no key, creating realistic car papers, false IDs, and, of course, bank robbery.  

Rogge was methodical in his preparation, which likely helped him elude capture for so long.  Rogge treated his bank robberies like a job.  He explains that it was a job he had to do well because of the grave consequences of a mistake.

One example of what Rogge looked for in a target bank was an all-female staff.  His theory was that women were less inclined to resist or play the hero.  Another key aspect was a good getaway - whether by stolen car, plane, or boat.

Rogge also had a rule that he did not want to commit a robbery when he was desperate for money because desperation would lead to rushing and mistakes.  His careful planning seems to have worked most of the time. 

It appears Rogge was extremely successful.  His robberies netted tens of thousands and sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars each.  Rogge and his wife traveled the country and large parts of the world for many years while he was on the FBI's top ten most wanted list and regularly featured on the television show "America's Most Wanted."  (It's unclear exactly how long he was on the run because there is not much sense of time provided.) 

The book sometimes skips over interesting parts of Rogge's story.  For example, two attempted prison escapes were disposed of in two sentences.  (Although a later successful escape is detailed and is almost unbelievable in its ease.)

This book is a good look into the mind of a criminal.  Rogge was not a violent criminal, but he had no regard for the law or the people and businesses he victimized. 

There is a distinct tone of admiration and pride that comes through from both author and subject.  Rogge seems to have no regard for the people whose IDs he stole or the bank tellers he frightened. Not to mention the banks and car dealerships he robbed of hundreds of thousands of dollars.   He almost seems to delight in his acts.  Rogge shows no remorse.  He even expresses confusion over why law enforcement authorities were so interested in him when he had never hurt anyone.

The book could have been better edited for ease of reading.  It comes across a little amateurish.  At times that is annoying and other times it is endearing.  

Overall, a worthwhile read.  Click below to check it out:

If you're a writer, check out my writer's guide of The Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery, and Legal Drama.  If you have a book you would like me to review, please contact me.

"Death in the City of Light" is a true crime book by David King about a serial killer who murdered dozens of people in Nazi-occupied Paris, France during World War II. 

The crimes committed by the accused serial killer and physician, Dr. Marcel Petiot, were truly horrible.  In addition to being gruesome, his crimes targeted some of the most vulnerable people during World War II - those who wanted to escape the Gestapo. 

Dr. Petiot was seen by those who knew him alternately as a charming humanitarian or a creep.  Dr. Petiot made a reputation for himself by providing free services to the poor.  He was also known to service drug users and was investigated more than once for improperly proscribing medication to addicts.

Petiot effectively used the Nazi occupation of Paris and the French Resistance movement to recruit new victims, prevent too many questions from being asked, and cover his crimes.  Once he is discovered and captured, the central question of his trial becomes whether his murders were committed for the Gestapo, the Resistance, or himself.

The book loses a lot of steam when the trial starts about halfway through.  Normally I'm fascinated by how a foreign country's criminal justice system and trial process compares to the United States, but this one got too bogged down in details.  Also, the author made a point of focusing on the defendant's "witty" remarks in court and the trial audience's delight in him, which was hard to take after learning of all the disgusting things he had done. 

More interesting were some of the procedures used in the French criminal court which were very different from a U.S. criminal trial.  For example, the first part of the trial was basically dedicated to an interrogation of the defendant by the trial judge and lawyers.  By contrast, in the U.S., we have the Fifth Amendment, which protects criminal defendants from ever having to speak in a criminal trial and even prevents the lawyers from commenting on his failure to testify.

Also, several of the victims in the French criminal trial were represented by civil attorneys who actively participated in the trial.  They questioned witnesses and presented evidence.  In the U.S. court system, criminal and civil trials are completely separate.

One of the things I was most struck by was the apparent lack of order in questioning and argument during the French trial.  The defendant and lawyers would speak up, question witnesses, and make arguments seemingly without structure or order.  If this is really the way of a French criminal trial, it is hard to imagine how anything could get accomplished with such a system.  Especially with so many lawyers involved and given lawyers' love of hearing themselves talk!

As far as foreign true crime serial killer books go, I preferred "The Monster of Florence" by Douglas Preston.

Check out my review of "The Monster of Florence" here.

Overall, however, the story underlying "Death in the City of Light" is simply too disturbing and intriguing to ignore. 

(Click the images or links above to check out the books for yourself.)

Also, get your free ebook revealing the Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery, and Legal Drama.

The true crime book, "Helter Skelter," was written by Vincent Bugliosi, the prosecutor who charged and convicted Charles Manson and four of his followers for the murders of Sharon Tate and her friends, as well as Leno and Rosemary LaBianca.  These crimes happened on two consecutive nights and were known as the Tate-LaBianca murders.

For someone born after the Manson murders occurred, and living in a time where it seems nothing is shocking anymore, reading about the sheer depravity and viciousness of these crimes is still horrifying.  The youth and susceptibility of the murderers, Manson's followers, was chilling.  Their willingness to believe in and follow Manson, someone we think of today as so obviously mad, was disturbing.  There were many times throughout the book where I shook my head and said, "These people were crazy!"

This is also a story that continues to raise its head from time to time, even more than 40 years later. Because their death sentences were reduced to life in prison with the possibility of parole, every couple years, one of the Manson Family comes up for parole, even Charles Manson himself is eligible.

Bruce Davis was recently recommended for parole by the California Parole Board. Davis was not one of the murderers at the Tate-Labianca crime scenes, but he did participate in related murders during the same timeframe. The final decision of parole rests with the California governor. 

The trial of Charles Manson and three of his followers for the Tate-LaBianca murders was filled with unusual occurrences and mysteries. 

One of the defense attorneys went missing in the middle of trial, and his body was later found wedged between two boulders in a place he often camped.  Although never proven, it was rumored that the Manson Family killed him for disobeying Manson when it came to trial strategy.

Several prosecution witnesses were threatened, and at least two had family members attempt to kill them.

Manson charged the judge at one point in the proceedings, prompting the judge to begin carrying a gun under his robe.  The three female defendants on trial with Manson often mimicked him and moved and spoke in unison. 

The defense rested without calling any witnesses, to which the three female defendants objected, stating they wanted to testify and absolve Manson of any participation in planning the murders.

Manson carved an "X" on his forehead, and the next day, his three co-defendants had done the same.

These acts by Manson's three co-defendants served to support the prosecution's theory that Manson was the puppeteer behind all their crimes.  Although he did not wield the deadly knives that took the lives of seven innocent people, Manson was responsible as the one who planned and ordered the killings.

There was at least one notable difference between the 1970-1971 trial described in Helter Skelter and the typical murder trial today.  Author Bugliosi describes the discovery of a knife on a Manson Family member in the courtroom.  Shortly afterward, metal detectors were erected outside the courtroom, through which anyone wanting to enter had to pass.  Of course, today I don't know if there's a courthouse left in the country without permanent metal detectors at the front doors.  There certainly are not any in L.A.  Indeed, the Criminal Courts Building in downtown Los Angeles has extra metal detectors and security through which any spectator has to pass on the ninth floor - where particularly notable or dangerous cases are tried.

The title of the book, Helter Skelter, was taken from the motive for the murders.  Manson believed that a race war was imminent, and he told his followers that Blacks would win that war.  However, they would not know how to lead, and would turn to him to lead the post-war world.  (Manson and his Family would hide out during the war in a secret city beneath Death Valley.) 

Manson believed The Beatles "White Album," which had recently been released in 1968, contained hidden messages telling people to begin the race war.  The White Album contains a song titled "Helter Skelter." 

When the war did not begin, Manson became impatient and told his followers they would have to show Black people how to do it.  The prosecution's theory was that the Tate-LaBiance murders were intended to look like Black people had committed the crimes, which would start the race war.

The author/prosecutor Bugliosi exposes many fumbles by LAPD, particularly by the old guard within LAPD who were not open to new methods of police investigation and detection.  The author's tone throughout the book is a little too self-important for my taste, but not enough to ruin the book.

The bottom line is that the Manson murders are to this day known as some of the most horrific and shocking in history, and with good reason.  I highly recommend this book to any lover of true crime.  (Click below to get your own copy.)

Also check out the documentary "Manson," that was released shortly after the book, Helter Skelter, and has interviews with author Bugliosi, several Manson Family members, as well as Charles Manson himself.

Be sure to get your free eBook revealing the Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery, and Legal Drama.

I am developing recommendation lists of the best all-time legal movies (drama and comedy), best crime movies, best legal and crime TV, best legal and crime novels, and best true crime books. 

This is a work in progress, but I wanted to post the movies I have listed so far.  Check it out:  Best Legal and Crime Movies

Feel free to let me know your thoughts on my lists, and let me know what your favorites are!

Also, get your free eBook revealing the Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery, and Legal Drama.

This true crime book describes a murder of a 3 year old boy in mid-1800s England.  The young victim of the Road Hill murder's throat was slit, and his body was dumped down an outdoor privy.  The crime occured in the middle of the night, and everyone in the household was a suspect. 

The crime captivated the public's imagination, and everyone had a theory about who did it.  The concept of the detective was new, and detective stories were popular throughout the country. 

The methods of investigation used were rudimentary and seriously flawed by today's standards.  It is hard to believe any crimes were solved in those days.

London's foremost detective, Mr. Whicher, was brought in to review the evidence after the local police could not solve the crime.  He pointed the finger at what seemed an unlikely suspect, and was denounced when the evidence did not prove guilt.

The crime and ensuing investigation are described it in a way that leave you guessing who the murderer is. 

The book spends far too much time discussing fictional detective stories of the time.  It is clear the author did a lot of research, but most of it does not enhance the underlying story here of the murder and detective.  The references to other stories are often distracting and uninteresting if you have not read the books to which she refers.

Although the book gets bogged down by details and sidetracked by side stories, the underlying crime story is a good one.  If you have the patience to wade through the muck, the root is a true crime story worth reading.

(Click below to check out the book.)

Also, get your free eBook revealing the Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery and Legal Drama. 

I recently read the true crime book, "Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil" by John Brendt.  On some level, I hesitate to call this a true crime book because it is largely about other happenings in Savannah, Georgia.  But a core storyline of the book follows the multiple murder trials of an antiques dealer, Jim Williams, who shot and killed his young lover, Danny Hansford.

Jim Williams made a life and a fortune for himself buying and restoring historic houses in downtown Savannah.  Danny Hansford was a troubled young man who was sexually appealing to both men and women. 

Danny occasionally worked for Jim and had the run of his restored mansion filled with antiques.  Jim provided Danny with money, a car, and other material things.  Danny did not seem to have a problem with his position as Jim's semi-secret lover as long Jim kept Danny financed.

One early morning, in Jim's study, Jim shot Danny three times, killing him.  Jim reported the shooting to police.  He explained that Danny had shot at him first, and he fired back in self defense.

Jim Williams was charged with murder.  His four trials centered around the question of whether Jim had killed Danny in cold blood or whether he acted in self defense. 

The book is not very detailed or technical in its coverage of the trials, but you finish the book feeling like you understand why the outcome of each trial and appeal was what it was.  There is also enough information given to allow the reader to come to their own conclusions about what really happened the night of the shooting.  But there are still questions left hanging.

The non-true-crime parts of the book are equally interesting.  The author, John Berendt, tells the story of his part-time life in Savannah.  He encounters and befriends a variety of eccentric characters, including a piano-playing lawyer with a revolving door of friends and scams, a trash-talking drag queen, and a voodoo witch doctor.

The book was made into a movie, "Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil," directed by Clint Eastwood, and starring John Cusack, Kevin Spacey, and Jude Law.

For an epilogue focusing on Jim Williams, and his non-fatal illegal dealings, check out "After Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil."  Although not nearly as well-written as the original (and filled with typos), "After Midnight" is a short, quick read that fills in a few gaps and presents a different perspective.

(Click the pictures to check out the books and movie.)

Let me know what you thought about "Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil."  And sign up for a free eBook on the Top 7 Mistakes Made by Writers of Crime, Mystery, and Legal Drama.

High profile cases are generally not the best examples of a criminal justice system at work.  I would certainly not want someone judging the American criminal justice system on the basis of the O.J. Simpson and Casey Anthony trials, for example. 

With that caution, Italy's investigation into a serial killer known as the Monster of Florence (il Mostro di Firenze), as presented in a gripping true crime book, The Monster of Florence, by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi, was nothing short of absurd.  

Although not well known in America, the Monster of Florence is one of the most famous serials killers known throughout the world.  The Monster preyed on young couples who used the hills surrounding Florence as an intimate escape. 

While the targeted couple was in the heat of passion in their car, the Monster would shoot the man, then the woman.  He would drag the woman from the car and cut out her vagina.  In later crimes he would also rip off the woman's left breast.

These horrific crimes, committed over a period of years, terrified people living in the Tuscany hills, and created a frenzy to find the killer or killers.

The book follows the decades of investigation and prosecution of several people accused of being the Monster, or being someone criminally associated with the Monster.  The investigators' theories evolve from a lone serial killer to a family of killers to a vast satanic consipracy involving most of Florence's upper class.  Even the book's authors were swept up in the investigation.

The authors convincingly present their own theory of the crimes and suspect.  My one complaint is that I wished the book had explained a little more was the Italian criminal justice system.  From the bits and pieces discussed, it appears the Italian system is very different from the U.S. system in some key respects (the prosecutor is a judge, a trial is heard by a panel of judges not lay jurors, an appeals court can hear new evidence). 

It would have been interesting to have a little more background on that.  Otherwise, I found the book to be a fascinating case study.  It's a must-read for any fan of true crime.  Despite the complexity of the story, it was a quick and enjoyable read.

There were also some interesting parallels for anyone who followed the Amanda Knox story (American exchange student Amanda Knox and her Italian boyfriend were convicted of murdering her roommate Meredith Kercher in Perugia, Italy).  The main prosecutor who believed in and investigated the satanic consipracy theories of the Monster killings was also Amanda Knox's prosecutor, and he advanced similar theories in that case.

For fans of The Silence of the Lambs (my favorite serial killer book and movie ever) and Hanibal, author Thomas Harris apparently followed the Monster investigations and used the case as inspiration for his books (click the images to order from Amazon).