double jeopardy

[Gunnar]

Can a member be changed with a violation be tried, found not guilty, and be recharged for the same violations two years later? 

[Joshua Katz]

Yes. RONR does not import the constitutional double jeopardy prohibition.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 12/1/2023 at 3:02 PM, Gunnar said:

Can a member be changed with a violation be tried, found not guilty, and be recharged for the same violations two years later? 

Yes.  Double Jeopardy protections apply only to criminal charges.  Discipline by a private society does not place anyone "in jeopardy of life or limb".

[Rob Elsman]

While I do agree that a member could technically be re-tried on the same charges and specifications from which he was previously exonerated, the previous exoneration is weighty evidence, indeed, for the member. 

Having a second trial not only affects the member; this time around, it also affects the society (the second trial implying that the society itself acted wrongfully just like the member it is trying).  Realistically, the exoneration of the member should mean that the matter is over and done with--permanently--full stop.

[J. J.]

On 12/1/2023 at 8:19 PM, Rob Elsman said:

While I do agree that a member could technically be re-tried on the same charges and specifications from which he was previously exonerated, the previous exoneration is weighty evidence, indeed, for the member. 

Having a second trial not only affects the member; this time around, it also affects the society (the second trial implying that the society itself acted wrongfully just like the member it is trying).  Realistically, the exoneration of the member should mean that the matter is over and done with--permanently--full stop.

Or, they may have found new evidence. 

[Rob Elsman]

No. It is specifically this kind of merry-go-round that I do not think is appropriate.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 12/2/2023 at 9:04 AM, Rob Elsman said:

No. It is specifically this kind of merry-go-round that I do not think is appropriate.

I don't think much of it either, but that wasn't the question.  And I could probably imagine a situation where I might go along with it.

[J. J.]

On 12/2/2023 at 9:04 AM, Rob Elsman said:

No. It is specifically this kind of merry-go-round that I do not think is appropriate.

It is not your call, however.  It is up to the assembly. 

[Shmuel Gerber]

Although there is no specific rule in RONR against bringing the same charges twice, it does say this:

"63:5 A member or officer has the right that allegations against his good name shall not be made except by charges brought on reasonable ground. If thus accused, he has the right to due process—that is, to be informed of the charge and given time to prepare his defense, to appear and defend himself, and to be fairly treated."

And "if the charges are not substantiated, the officer or member is exonerated and any authority, rights, duties, and privileges of office or membership that had been suspended are automatically restored." (63:30)

I think it is reasonable to assume in most cases that it would be unfair, and a violation of due process, to prefer charges again and hold another trial at a later time for the same offense. 

But if (very) good cause can be shown, then it's possible that another investigation and trial might be justified. For example, if criminal proceedings were brought and the member was found guilty in a court of law, I don't think the society would be required to keep him as a member simply because its own investigation and trial were insufficient to prove guilt.