Beyond Reasonable Doubt Standard of Proof and Evaluation of Evidence in Criminal Cases
نویسنده
چکیده
The public debate concerning evaluation of evidence in criminal cases has been characterised by a couple of misconceptions. The first is linked with criticism, frequent among both laymen and jurists, directed at the courts for having relaxed the required standard of proof with regard to a certain case or a certain type of cases. The second misunderstanding, which arises for obvious reasons only among jurists, is the fact that Ekelöf’s theory of evidence (and the so called evidence value method) constitutes a theoretical basis for the evaluation of evidence actually performed by the courts. In this article both of these misconceptions are discussed.
منابع مشابه
Towards Shared Understanding of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
The concept of ‘beyond reasonable’ doubt is a standard of the legal system; however, it is a standard that is not well defined. Differences in the way beyond reasonable doubt is applied in different courts suggest the need for shared understanding of the concept. This paper explores the technique of mathematical modeling to illuminate this concept/abstraction in order to have a shared understan...
متن کاملJurors' use of standards of proof in decisions about punitive damages.
Standards of proof define the degree to which jurors must be satisfied that a fact is true, and plaintiffs in civil lawsuits assume the burden of proving their claims to the requisite standard of proof. Three standards-preponderance of evidence, clear and convincing evidence, and beyond a reasonable doubt-are used by different jurisdictions in trials involving liability for punitive damages. We...
متن کاملConstitutional Law - Criminal Law - Confessions Need Not Be Proved Voluntary Beyond a Reasonable Doubt Prior to Being Admitted into Evidence
متن کامل
Probabilistic Reasoning Using Incomplete and Singular or Unique Evidence: Complexity-Based Reasoning Innovation for Commanders
Military commanders face challenges that their counterparts in the business world would confront only in the rarest of circumstances. Commanders must make decisions that place their human and equipment resources in harm’s way. When a commander or senior civilian military decision-maker must commit to an action that endangers the lives of his or her troops, their decisions and the information or...
متن کاملMeasuring the Consequences of Criminal Jury Trial Protections
The Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution guarantee criminal defendants the right to a jury trial and require that the elements of crimes be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Academics, judges, and practitioners generally assume that these constitutional guarantees protect defendants. Recently, however, scholars and even members of the Supreme Court have suggested that expand...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2008