Obviously I am referring to OJ. They were debating this topic at work today. I'm interested in your thoughts.
2007-11-20 14:50:54 · 9 answers · asked by Linz VT•AM 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Yes, there are different burdens of proof, and different rules of evidence. It is a totally different trial.
A substantial amount of evidence, and testimony, were not allowed in the criminal trial, that were allowed in the wrongful death suit because of these differences.
2007-11-20 14:53:36 · answer #1 · answered by trooper3316 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Acquitted does not mean "innocent" it means "not guilty" there is a big difference in this understanding. The government will get one shot to prosecute this person, then the victims will get a shot to try him in civil case, generally only one though. Although unlikely though it is possible for the reverse to happen, he could have been convicted in criminal trial, and found not liable in the civil trial. The two do not always have to intermingle.
2007-11-20 15:31:42 · answer #2 · answered by Damien T 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No I don't. Not that I'm a fan of O.J. or anything, but I don't see how it could ever be considered fair for someone to be tried twice for the same crime. Either you did it and you're convicted or you didn't do it and you're acquitted. Trying over and over to convict someone for the same crime in different ways until you get the desired result is an injustice and has no place in a free society.
2007-11-20 14:58:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Of course it's fair.
When you kill someone, you've damaged society as a whole by committing a crime. Society charges you, criminally, with doing that. Since you have the whole power of the government up against you, they have to prove your guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" - a very high standard.
But, as well as the general harm to society, you also caused a specific harm to the victims family, and for that they have the right to sue you in civil court. Since it's just one individual against another, the burden of proof is weaker - the "preponderance of the evidence".
Richard
2007-11-20 14:56:07 · answer #4 · answered by rickinnocal 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, we are talking about 2 completely different systems of justice. The first being the criminal court system and the second being the civil court system.
2007-11-20 14:58:07 · answer #5 · answered by Mr. E 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it is fair. These are two separate systems here (civil and criminal) and the burden of proof is different.
2007-11-20 16:00:57 · answer #6 · answered by Pinkfrrt 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, murder (criminal) and wrongful death (civil) are two different charges.
2007-11-20 15:30:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, so we don't even have to impeach those bastards Cheney and Bush before we can sue them, but they do have to be indicted and convicted before we can execute them as their treason deserves.
2007-11-20 15:00:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-11-20 14:54:09 · answer #9 · answered by Mary Jo W 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋