The Ethicality Of Double Jeopardy Law

This year in the Unites States, countless murderers, rapists, thieves, and other criminals will walk free among you and your loved ones due to the existence of a law which protects them from their arrest. It doesn't matter whether these acquitted convicts have confessed, or new evidence surfaces, they will not be sentenced. This bill, which has the ability to create corruption in the ordinance process and keep a killer from being locked up, is known as the double jeopardy law.
To understand the logistics of what is wrong with the double jeopardy law, you must first know what it is. The double jeopardy law prohibits an individual from being tried on the same charges twice. This means that if someone is found not guilty of a crime they were accused of, they cannot be tried again. It was originally founded upon the 5th amendment to prevent double punishment, which i believe is a good concept, but the trouble arises in situations where new evidence on the case surfaces, or the criminal confesses and there is nothing the law can do because the accused has already been acquitted of all charges.
These tools have many helpful uses and should be able to be utilized by police and detectives to help unearth the most accurate information. Today, devices that could only have been dreamt about 20 years ago are a reality. Drones, Smartphones, and Biometric information (fingerprints and retina scanning) are just a few of the many leaps and bounds we have made in terms of technology. This means that cases from long ago have not been examined with the full potential they could be. The world and the way we use technology is changing and expanding, and i believe that the law system should grow with it. With the double jeopardy law still being implicated, it is not possible for this to