[dala dala]

WanaJF hususani jamvi la Sheria naomba msaada wenu. Ndugu yangu alishitakiwa kwa kosa la jinai, kesi imekuwa ikisomwa mara kwa mara kwa muda usiopungua siku tisini (90) baada ya hapo mahakama ikaamua kufuta kesi hiyo kwa kuwa shahidi (mshitaki) hajawahi tokea mahakamani toka shauri lianze. Baada ya kesi kufutwa, washitakiwa wamekamatwa tena na kufunguliwa mashitaka yale yale waliyofutiwa na mahakama. Sasa je ni halali kushitakiwa kwa kosa ulilofutiwa na mahakama katika mahakama hiyo hiyo? Nisaidieni ndugu zangu.

[Bwa'Nchuchu]

Je, kuna ushahidi mpya zaidi ya ule wa awali uliopelekea mashitaka kufutwa?

On the surface, double jeopardy comes to mind. I doubt if we have any constitutional protections against it.

[Bandio]

Ni halali, na nafikiri hata siku aliyoachiwa na mahakama alielezwa.

[don-oba]

Km mlalamikaji alikua hatokei mahakamani then akatokea na akatoa sababu za msingi kwanini alikua anatokea, mlalamikiwa atakamatwa au ataitwa mahakamani tena kusikiliza kesi ya msingi. Kwahiyo mkuu, ni haki kukamatwa tena. Hayo ndo madhara ya ex perte judgement!.

[Mr Rocky]

NAfikiri hata wakati wanaachiliwa waliambiwa kabisa kuwa wanaweza kukamatwa na kushtakiwa kwa kosa hilo hilo
Ndo maana wengine wakipata opportunity hiyo huwa wanakimbia mbaya kabisa kuepuka kukamatwa tena

[Bwa'Nchuchu]

NAfikiri hata wakati wanaachiliwa waliambiwa kabisa kuwa wanaweza kukamatwa na kushtakiwa kwa kosa hilo hilo
Ndo maana wengine wakipata opportunity hiyo huwa wanakimbia mbaya kabisa kuepuka kukamatwa tena

Huo ni usumbufu tu unless kuna ushahidi mwingine zaidi ya ule wa mwanzo.

[dala dala]

Nawashukuru sana wachangiaji wote. Ni kweli waliambiwa kuwa wanaweza kushitakiwa tena. Ila ushahidi mpya haujapatikana kwani mbali ya mshitaki kushindwa kutokea mahakamani vile vile polisi walishindwa kuwasilisha ushahidi mbele ya mahakama. Thanks alot for the eye opener colleagues. God bless you for that.

[Bandio]

Huo ni usumbufu tu unless kuna ushahidi mwingine zaidi ya ule wa mwanzo.

Mambo ya procedure hayo mkuu. Kwani kuna shida gani, kama ushahidi haupo si ataachiwa tena? Na akiona kulikuwa na hila atapoachiwa ataweza kufungua madai.

Usiwe na wasiwasi mkuu.

[Nyani Ngabu]

Mambo ya procedure hayo mkuu. Kwani kuna shida gani, kama ushahidi haupo si ataachiwa tena? Na akiona kulikuwa na hila atapoachiwa ataweza kufungua madai.

Usiwe na wasiwasi mkuu.

Procedures hazitakiwi zilete usumbufu kwa watu. Kama mwanzoni waliona ushahidi haukutosha kuendelea na kesi iweje akamatwe tena na kufunguliwa mashitaka yale yale kwa kutumia ushahidi ule ule?

That makes no doggone sense to me. I wish we had double jeopardy laws.

[kelvinkipeta]

dont worry my friend,law is a noble proffessional,let me help you as follows;-according to your explaination we must keep ourselves busy in the CRIMINLA PROCEDURE CODE CAP 20 OF THE LAWS OF TANZANIA. PARTICULARLY UNDER SECTION 137 AND SECTION 138,HOWEVER SECTION 137 OF THE SAID LAW PROVIDES AS HEREUNDER ENUMERATED;-
A person who has once been tried by a court of competent jurisdiction for an offence and convicted or acquitted of such offence shall, while such conviction or acquittal has not been reversed or set aside, not be liable to be tried again on the same facts for the same offence. BUT ALSO SECTION 138 OF THA SAME LAW PROVIDES FURTHER THAT;-
A person convicted or acquitted of any offence may be afterwards tried for any other offence with which he might have been charged on the former trial under subsection (1) of section 134. IN ORDER FOR U TO BE CLEAR I ALSO INSERT SECTION 134(1) OF THE SAME LAW SO AS FOR U TO BE CLEAR;-
134. Joinder of two or more accused in one charge or information
(1) The following persons may be joined in one charge or information and may be tried together, namely–
(a) persons accused of the same offence committed in the course of the same transaction;
(b) persons accused of an offence and persons accused of abetting or an attempt to commit such an offence;
(c) persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction;
(d) persons accused of any offence under Chapter XXV to XXXI of the Penal Code * and persons accused of receiving or retaining property, possession of which is alleged to have been transferred by any such offence committed by the first-named persons, or on abetment of or attempting to commit either of such last-named offences;
(e) persons accused of any offence relating to counterfeit coin under Chapter XXXVI of the Penal Code *, and persons accused of any other offence under the said Chapter relating to the same coin, or of abetment of or attempting to commit any such offence; or
(f) persons accused of any economic offence under the Economic and Organised Crime Control Act *.
(2) For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that nothing in this section or in this Act shall be construed as preventing persons who have been committed for trial separately from being joined in one charge or information and being tried together if they are persons who fall under any of the categories specified in subsection (1). I HAVE NO DOUBT UP TO THAT AND I THINK YOU ARE NOW CLEAR OF THE PROBLEM FACING YOUR RELATIVE-THANKS