# When at first you don't succede try and Try again

Sherlock had just arrived to work one day when he happened to overhear a conversation between some coworkers on the way in. The conversation went like this:

Bob: Did you hear they just came back with a verdict on the murder trial? They jury found her not guilty.

Alice: That's insane, Everyone knows she's guilty. She practically admitted to it before her lawyer forced her to plead the fifth! Just because she's a celebrity and got some fancy expensive lawyer to make up stories about police misconduct and fabricated conspiracies doesn't change the fact that all the evidence shows she clearly shot that poor man. This is a travesty of justice!

Bob: Yeah so far all the news I see agrees with you that she should have been found guilty. But look on the bright side, she could still be found guilty for that murder in another trial, after all legally she could be tried for murder up to 6 more times for shooting him.

Eve: More, if you count civil suits.

Sherlock hurried on to his office to start his day of work, missing the rest of the conversation. He was never one to kept up with the News, so this is the first he had heard about the trial his coworkers were discussing, but it seemed interesting enough that he was tempted to look it up during his lunch break. He would have thought they would have video cameras or other witnesses at such an important location as where the murder must have happened, something to help identify the killer easier.

Where does Sherlock think the murder happened, and why?

Note that while the murder could have taken place at a number of locations given convoluted enough circumstances, I think one location makes the most sense to be the one Sherlock is presuming, given his thought process.

• Is the (mis)spelling in the title intentional? – Rubio Aug 31 '18 at 17:18
• Has a correct answer been given? If so, please don't forget to $\color{green}{\checkmark \small\text{Accept}}$ it :) – Rubio 7 hours ago

The murder must be in

The United States.

This is because

The defendant was able to plead the Fifth Amendment.

That said,

I believe the Fifth Amendment protects against retrials when the Defendant is found not guilty. (If the jury was hung, that’s a different story.) This is true for federal trials only.

Specifically,

The woman is a Navajo tribesperson who shot a man from the Hopi tribe at Four Corners, in Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona.

Although the woman

Cannot be tried again in federal court, she may be tried again in state courts; at this precise location she committed a crime in 4 different states and so 4 states may prosecute her. The tribes are important because she may also be tried by the justice systems of the two tribes.

Alternatively,

The woman in killing him committed a war crime and crime against humanity, and so would also be able to be prosecuted in The Hague and in Geneva or Nuremberg for the last two trials.

• I was looking for something more exact then just the country. And I also stand by the question exactly as written, despite your last comment :P – dsollen Aug 31 '18 at 17:08
• Well I’ve got a meme answer then... – El-Guest Aug 31 '18 at 17:16