Beyond all reasonable doubt was good enough up to now.
2007-04-25 00:38:37 · 6 answers · asked by Barbara Doll to you 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
In the UK, the criminal justice system operates on the standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt'. It is not beyond ALL reasonable doubt and it is not certainty.
Nothing in criminal proceedings has to be absolutely 100% certain - not even the identity of the defendant.
The illustration given by Judges in their direction to the jury on what is 'beyond reasonable doubt' is usually that "you need to be sure, not certain because you can be certain of very little in life; but sure in the way you are when taking major life decision, such as buying a house or taking on a large debt".
In the civil courts the standard is on the balance of probabilities, in other words, more likely than not.
If you want to get very technical, there are hybrids. For example, ASBO's can be imposed on the basis of the balance of probabilities, but breaching the terms results in a criminal penalty.
2007-04-25 00:47:53 · answer #1 · answered by JZD 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Beyond reasonable doubt is the level of proving the guilt of a person because it is better to set free a thousand guilty persons rather than imprisoning a single innocent person.
2007-04-25 00:43:35 · answer #2 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the US reasonable doubt should be good enough - except we have death penalty and we have Guantanamo, sure would hate for anything less than 100% certainty to put anyone in those places.
2007-04-25 00:49:08 · answer #3 · answered by ash 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Beyond reasonable doubt is the best that humanity can do.
2007-04-25 01:01:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Theres no such thing as 100% certain.
Unless of course your name is Bush or Blair.
2007-04-25 00:43:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well it's not working now.- 98% of those 'prosecuted' are men. Can we spell discrimination.
2007-04-25 00:46:36 · answer #6 · answered by Put_ya_mitts_up 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋