Can a person be found guilty off he said/ she said?

Question

I am involved in a court case that basically comes down to she says one thing happened, she says another thing happened. How is this going to play an affect on the jury and what is the usual outcome in cases like this?

Answer 1

Depends on the type of case. If it's a criminal matter, the standard of proof is "beyond a reasonable doubt," so the chances of you getting convicted are very slim without some other evidence corroborating her story. In a civil case, however, the standard is "preponderence of the evidence," which comes down to which explanation is more likely -- yours or hers. Without knowing the specific details of the case it's very hard to say who would win a civil suit, but I can tell you that a lot of it will come down to the credibility of the witnesses, so your best bet (aside from giving your side of the story) is to present evidence to show that she is dishonest or is otherwise untrustworthy.

Answer 2

There is no usual outcome. Every case turns on its own facts. The fact that the case is a he said she said isn't dispositive. The trier of fact, either the judge or jury, will assess the credibility of the witnesses and hear the testimony and decide the case. In a criminal case the standard is guilt byond a reasonable doubt. But if the trier of fact absolutely believes on side and does not believe the other side, then you can find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A lot goes into the decision and simply being he said she said doesn;t necessarily determine the outcome.

Answer 3

Unfortunately, the legal system in the US claims to do one thing, and in reality, that doesn't always happen. Otherwise, we would not have people getting released from prison, as the result of dna evidence which PROVES they were innocent all along.
Hope to hell you have a GOOD lawyer, who can make the jury understand there is no proof of what the other person says. Of couse, it works both ways. The fact that there is no proof does not make it automatically false.

Answer 4

If you have a jury trial it can (and often does) come down to who the jury finds more credible as a witness. Jurors are asked to implicitly assess witness credibility all the time.

Answer 5

Whichever side the judge/jury finds more plausible. There is no USUAL outcome.

Answer 6

I don't think so. In a straight up court case, he said/ she said isn't enough. More evidence is needed to convict you. If you do, it won't be for long without sufficient evidence. HS/SS is can't stand on its own.

Answer 7

I didn't think here say evident's was legal. But then don't count on it, courts do what the hell they want to. Good luck! Hope you beat the charge.

Answer 8

Sarge is right

Most civil matters are he said/ she said

Answer 9

You need evidence. If the glove don't fit, you must acquit.