goodday, i would like to know whether its possible for someone to be
re-tried for a crime of which they were acquitted 30 years earlier if
one is in possession of new evidence and if possible, where would be
the best place to begin and who would be the best person to submit the
evidence to.

Hello herculina,

As stated in the disclaimer at the bottom of this page, answers and
comments provided on Google Answers are general information, and are
not intended to substitute for informed professional legal advice.

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution contains a "double
jeopardy" clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same
offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb").  There are many
discussions of this clause on the Web and elsewhere, including this
one from FindLaw:

"U.S. Constitution: Fifth Amendment"
FindLaw
http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/amendment05/index.html

"U.S. Constitution: Fifth Amendment -- Reprosecution Following Acquittal"
FindLaw
http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/amendment05/04.html

"U.S. Constitution: Fifth Amendment -- 'For the Same Offence'"
FindLaw
http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/constitution/amendment05/06.html

You might wish to click the links to see Supreme Court decisions on
issues that you think are particularly interesting in this discussion.

Again, I cannot provide legal advice, but I would personally summarize
FindLaw's discussion this way:  As a general rule, a defendant may not
be retried following an acquittal for the same offense.  If there was
not a true acquittal or if the charge was not for the same offense, a
defendant may be tried for the different offense.

In your question, you use the phrase "re-tried for a crime of which
they were acquitted."  If there was an acquittal for the same crime
(offense), then it would appear that there cannot be a retrial. 
However, the facts of the particular "acquittal" or the "offense"
might conceivably provide an argument for a new trial.

A reasonable place to begin would be the prosecutor's office (often
called district attorney's office) in the jurisdiction where the
original trial took place.  As the FindLaw discussion indicates, the
double jeopardy clause concerns the possibility of a second
prosecution.  Presumably, the prosecutor's office that handled the
original trial would also prosecute any second trial, and would
evaluate whether double jeopardy or any other obstacle stands in the
way.  Alternatively, you might want to contact the police department
that investigated the original case; presumably, it would do any
further investigation if the case were to reopen.  (Perhaps the
prosecutor's office will even refer you to the police department, so
that you can start there.)  The police normally investigate crimes,
and the prosecutor normally prosecutes them; I presume that they would
be the ones to do so now if there is sufficient basis for doing so.

If you need clarification within the scope of your original question,
please let me know, so that I may do additional research.

- justaskscott


Search strategy --

Search terms used on Google, in several combinations:

"double jeopardy"
"retried * the same"
"tried * the same"
"second prosecution"
site:findlaw.com
inurl:caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us

Thank you so much.  
The way in which my question was answered provided clarity and
contained no confusing legal jargon.  I am now able to follow up on
the excellent advice.
Thank you

You can't be tried for the exact same crime, but you can be tried for
a different crime or through a different court.

For instance, if one was acquited in a state court, Federal charges
could be brought.  If someone was acquited of murder, other crimes
like mayhem, assault, kidnapping, conspiracy, etc, could be levied in
an attempt to at least get the person serve some time for the crimes