Double jeopardy is one of the most important principles in criminal law. The idea that once a person is found not guilty, they cannot be tried again for the same offence. But in the UK, that rule changed. In this episode of True Crime Catch Up, we explore the law of double jeopardy, the Criminal Justice Act 2003, and how advances in forensic science - particularly DNA evidence - have allowed some of the most serious cases to be reopened. From the murder of Julie Hogg to the landmark Stephen Lawrence case, we break down how “new and compelling evidence” can lead to a retrial years after an acquittal.

But has this reform improved justice, or weakened it? We examine the ethical debate at the heart of double jeopardy: justice vs finality, the risk of wrongful convictions, and whether the state now has too much power. With real life cases, controversial retrials, and thought-provoking questions, this episode dives into one of the most debated topics in true crime. Can a jury ever truly be impartial the second time around? And what matters more - protecting the innocent, or ensuring the guilty don’t walk free?

Follow True Crime Catch Up on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠social media⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Listen to our solo podcasts:

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠British Murders with Stuart Blues⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠UK True Crime Podcast

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices