English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Why do we have different standards in a civil law case vs. a criminal law case?

2007-12-06 18:26:30 · 5 answers · asked by carol h 1 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

5 answers

Civil trials do not end up with people going to jail. The civil cases usually involve personal injury, or loss due to another person's incompetence. Say a person does not do something they signed a contract to do; the other party can sue in civil court to get compensation. Civil trials also cover divorce proceedings.

Criminal trials mean that somebody committed a crime. The trial will decide if the accused is guilty or not and what punishment (if any) must be served.

2007-12-06 18:35:00 · answer #1 · answered by Kevin k 7 · 0 0

Well the most important "different standard" is the burden of proof.

In a criminal trial the State must prove their case "beyond reasonable doubt", while in a civil trial the person bringing the suit must prove his case only by "a preponderance of the evidence".

That means, say, 95% sure in a criminal case, 51% sure in a civil case.

The other big difference is that in a civil case there is no 5th Amendment right against self incrimination. Either side in a civil case can require the other party to take the stand and answer questions.

Richard

2007-12-06 18:39:16 · answer #2 · answered by rickinnocal 7 · 0 0

There are huge differences between Civil and Criminal trials. Usually , in a Criminal trial someone is on trial and he is guaranteed the full Panoply of Consitutional rights that Civil Litigants are not. For Example the 1st,4th, 5th,6th, 8th amendment protections. Proof beyond a Reasonable doubt is required.
In a civil case you may win as a Plaintiff for damages against a Defendant based on damages, and unless you are in the Federal courts, the 7th amendment does not apply to you. And the other amendments from the Bill of rights aforementioned do not come into play. You have two different burdens of proof. and so on and so on.

2007-12-06 18:39:19 · answer #3 · answered by Paul K 3 · 0 0

In a offender trial the plaintiff is often the government. In a civil trial a private social gathering information a lawsuit and is the plaintiff. In civil litigation, the plaintiff wins if the preponderance of the evidence favors the plaintiff. case in point, if the jury believes that there is greater advantageous than a 50% danger that the defendant replaced into negligent in inflicting the plaintiff's injury, the plaintiff wins. that's an extremely low familiar, whilst in comparison with offender regulation, that's previous a sensible doubt.

2016-11-13 22:56:50 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

civil trial is to "recover" damages caused. Where as criminal usually ends with jail time or probation.

Civil trial convicts somebody not on sole fault rather then the percentage of fault.

Example: OJ simpson was guilty but found not guilty by criminal court. So the browns took him to civil court where they found him to be a percentage at fault.

So as free as everybody thinks oj is hes really no all his assets are tied to the browns due to money owed this is why he keeps writing books.

2007-12-06 18:40:15 · answer #5 · answered by Thomas L 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers