Double Jeopardy: Hollywood vs. Reality
Coworkers & Crime · Rachel and Krystal
Audio is streamed directly from the publisher (content.rss.com) as published in their RSS feed. Play Podcasts does not host this file. Rights-holders can request removal through the copyright & takedown page.
Show Notes
Rachel and Krystal break down the biggest myths about the Double Jeopardy Clause — and explain why Hollywood gets it wrong. From the “I was acquitted, so now I can confess!” trope to the idea that a hung jury means freedom, this episode uses real Supreme Court cases to separate legal fact from pop‑culture fiction. We also explore where double jeopardy does protect you, and why the real doctrine is far more complicated than TV makes it seem.
Primary Sources Cited:
- Fong Foo v. United States, 369 U.S. 141 (1962)
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (1932)
- Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985)
- Gamble v. United States, 587 U.S. ___ (2019)
- United States v. Perez, 22 U.S. 579 (1824)
- United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 U.S. 564 (1977)
- Serfass v. United States, 420 U.S. 377 (1975)
- United States v. Scott, 437 U.S. 82 (1978)
Topics: Double jeopardy myths, dual sovereignty, mistrials, dismissals vs. acquittals, Hollywood inaccuracies, criminal procedure.