Fukkin Explain something to me, cause I'm a moron...

[PornoDoggy]

A criminal trial literally finds you guilty of a crime, and such conviction required proof beyond a reasonable doubt. {For the sake of neatness, we will ignore the fact that the race or socioeconomic status of the defendant often constitutes some of the reason there can be no reasonable doubt}

A civil trial doesn’t convict you of anything. In a civil trial you are found based on the preponderance of the evidence to have done X, which has caused harm to Y, and the court can award you damages in the amount of Z.

Double Jeopardy (or a standard like it) applies to both civil and criminal matters, but each within their own system. If Dravyk sues pushpills in PA for emotional distress caused by the mention of his testicles in his signature and loses, he cannot re-file the suit in IL or in Federal Court. He can appeal the judgment to a higher court, but only for errors of law.

You can, in fact, be tried more than once for the same ACTION so long as that action has been found to constitute more than one criminal offense. For example, there have been a number of Federal convictions for civil rights violations where the accused had previously been acquitted of murder by juries. Federal RICO convictions have also been obtained against individuals who have been acquitted by state juries for the same actions.

It is conceivable that an individual could be acquitted of the Federal crime of carjacking and still be prosecuted at the state level for assault or murder or auto theft. I expect that one to happen someday, probably in a state like Connecticut without a death penalty.