| evidentiary burden in civil vs. criminal trial |
| Interviewing - Mates - Chief Engineers - Designated Duty Engineers - Interviews - Deckhands Able Bodied Seamen - Tankermen - Dispatchers - QMED - Interviewing |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Burden of Proof in a Criminal Trial vs. a Civil Trial
Criminal cases differ from civil cases in the burden of proving a case. The
page criminal law vs. civil law discusses the basic differences between
criminal law and civil law. But aside from differences in terms of crimes
versus civil wrongs, the evidentiary burden in proving a case differs.
In a criminal case, attorneys for the victim must prove that the perpetrator
committed the criminal act. And they must prove it beyond a reasonable
doubt. That’s why criminal defense attorneys sometimes say, “I don’t have
to prove the entire case the way the plaintiff (victim) did. I only have to show
reasonable doubt that my client didn’t do it.” Naturally, evidence becomes
complex in a high stakes case and both sides wind up presenting and
arguing elements of the case. When the state district attorney (or the
federal prosecutor in a federal case) must prove that the perpetrator
committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, that means that they
have to prove it with a very high degree of certainty. Maybe not 100%, but in
the very high 90 percentiles.
Now compare that to the evidentiary burden faced by attorneys for the
plaintiff in a civil case. Unlike a criminal proceeding, we are generally not
dealing with a violent crime, murder, rape (although we could be - such as
a civil action based on previous crime. Look at some of the high profile
trials such as the O.J. Simpson case. Although the prosecution team was
not able to obtain a conviction from the jury in the O.J. trial, there was a
subsequent wrongful death case filed after the criminal proceedings).
In a civil trial, the burden is that of proving that something happened “by a
reasonable preponderance”. This standard is easier to meet that the
burden set in a criminal trial. By a reasonable preponderance basically
means prove that it was likelier than not that the incident happened. For
example, in a motor vehicle accident personal injury trial, if the plaintiff is
suing for a fractured leg bone, he or she can meet this burden by
producing evidence in the way of exhibit a - police report, exhibit b - hospital
emergency room admission records, exhibit c - hospital radiology records
for an x-ray of the left femur, exhibit d - testimony of bystander who said the
claimant was stopped at a red light when the defendant hit his car in the
rear, etc. All these items of evidence serve to satisfy the evidentiary burden
in a civil case.
Criminal cases differ from civil cases in the burden of proving a case. The
page criminal law vs. civil law discusses the basic differences between
criminal law and civil law. But aside from differences in terms of crimes
versus civil wrongs, the evidentiary burden in proving a case differs.
In a criminal case, attorneys for the victim must prove that the perpetrator
committed the criminal act. And they must prove it beyond a reasonable
doubt. That’s why criminal defense attorneys sometimes say, “I don’t have
to prove the entire case the way the plaintiff (victim) did. I only have to show
reasonable doubt that my client didn’t do it.” Naturally, evidence becomes
complex in a high stakes case and both sides wind up presenting and
arguing elements of the case. When the state district attorney (or the
federal prosecutor in a federal case) must prove that the perpetrator
committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, that means that they
have to prove it with a very high degree of certainty. Maybe not 100%, but in
the very high 90 percentiles.
Now compare that to the evidentiary burden faced by attorneys for the
plaintiff in a civil case. Unlike a criminal proceeding, we are generally not
dealing with a violent crime, murder, rape (although we could be - such as
a civil action based on previous crime. Look at some of the high profile
trials such as the O.J. Simpson case. Although the prosecution team was
not able to obtain a conviction from the jury in the O.J. trial, there was a
subsequent wrongful death case filed after the criminal proceedings).
In a civil trial, the burden is that of proving that something happened “by a
reasonable preponderance”. This standard is easier to meet that the
burden set in a criminal trial. By a reasonable preponderance basically
means prove that it was likelier than not that the incident happened. For
example, in a motor vehicle accident personal injury trial, if the plaintiff is
suing for a fractured leg bone, he or she can meet this burden by
producing evidence in the way of exhibit a - police report, exhibit b - hospital
emergency room admission records, exhibit c - hospital radiology records
for an x-ray of the left femur, exhibit d - testimony of bystander who said the
claimant was stopped at a red light when the defendant hit his car in the
rear, etc. All these items of evidence serve to satisfy the evidentiary burden
in a civil case.
With the grounding of the bulk
carrier Selendang Ayu, off the
coast of Unalaska, the Dept of
Justice handled the incident as
a criminal prosecution
carrier Selendang Ayu, off the
coast of Unalaska, the Dept of
Justice handled the incident as
a criminal prosecution
