I don't think it is fair that a person is found not guilty of murder can be sued in a civil suit. WHY is this?

Answer 1

In a criminal trial guilt has to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt". In a civil one, only by the preponderance (>50%) of the evidence.

Answer 2

You know, I have also wondered about that. If you are found not guilty, then you shouldn't be able to be sued in civil court. To me you are either guilty or not. It is like saying you were found not guilty, but we think you did it anyway.

Answer 3

the reason is simple. there are two types of redress in our judicial system. criminal courts where a defendant faces the possibility of being fined and or incarcerated. the evidence must be beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a crime.
the other court is cival court where wrong doings are punished in the form of monetary considerations, however..unlike criminal court, the thresh hold for conviction is much smaller. you need to only have evidence show that there is a lilelyhood that the defendant committed the act.
i hope this answer helps.

Answer 4

I'll tell you what would be fair: If someone like Bill Gates would pay off OJ's $33 million dollar civil suit, and then OJ could set a booth downtown, signing head shots of himself that say "I DID IT!"

Answer 5

some people think its far to hard convict for murder beyond a reasonable doubt. vs- civil courts where to prove its only preponderance of the proof.its like 99.99 for murder-v-51-49 civil.

Answer 6

You don't think O.J.Simpson was guilty then?. The only option for the victims families was through the civil courts.

Answer 7

Simply screwed up system. America needs to clean up on it's way outdated laws.

Answer 8

wasup OJ