The main reason that the high proof standard of reasonable doubt is used in criminal trials is that criminal trials can result in the deprivation of a defendant's liberty or in the defendant's death, outcomes far more severe than occur in civil trials where money damages are the common remedy. Clear and convincing evidence is evidence that establishes a high probability that the fact sought to be proved is true. ![]() A preponderance of the evidence simply means that one side has more evidence in its favor than the other, even by the smallest degree. In civil litigation the standard of proof is either proof by a preponderance of the evidence or proof by clear and convincing evidence. Reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof used in court. Conversely, if the jurors or judge have no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts, then the prosecutor has proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant should be pronounced guilty. If the jury-or the judge in a bench trial-has a reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt, the jury or judge should pronounce the defendant not guilty. When a criminal defendant is prosecuted, the prosecutor must prove the defendant's guilt Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. Reasonable doubt is a standard of proof used in criminal trials. A standard of proof that must be surpassed to convict an accused in a criminal proceeding.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |