Can someone explain our Legal System?

[Cricket]

There are quite a few smart legal-minded people on MJ who may be able to tell me how it is that a man who is found innocent of most of a Prosecution's charges (or cannot reach a conclusion on those charges) can thereafter be tried over and over again by the same court until he is found guilty of more charges. If a jury doesn't satisfy the court with the verdict that it seeks on the first go-around, is it just to find another jury that will?

BTW I am no fan of the Illinois governor.

[NotNow]

The jury did not find him "innocent".  It was a locked jury and, just as in a mistrial, the State can ask for a new trial.

[Cricket]

The jury did not find him "innocent".  It was a locked jury and, just as in a mistrial, the State can ask for a new trial.

You missed the parentheses (or cannot reach a conclusion on those charges). Should the State be helll-bent on reaching a conclusion? And if a conclusion cannot be reached by a jury selected by both State and Defence what happens if the second jury also deadlocks.

[Jumpinjack]

I believe I heard today that the jury was ready 11-1 to convict on all charges. That's pretty convincing.

[NotNow]

If it happens again, the State will decide again whether a new trial is warranted.  This is a nationally watched case....with an 11-1 locked jury.  Of course it will be retried.

[buckethead]

I could be persuaded to perform jury duty for a nominal fee.

Verdict results are negotiable.

The Clinton Administration would never have let things go this far. 

[Cricket]

If it happens again, the State will decide again whether a new trial is warranted.  This is a nationally watched case....with an 11-1 locked jury.  Of course it will be retried.

At the taxpayers' expense.

[NotNow]

Yes, as are all trials.  This is a LEGITIMATE, CONSTITUTIONAL use of government funds. Are you just as opposed to appeals by the convicted?