Burden Of Proof In Criminal Law

It is a very important responsibility that everyone should take seriously because the fate of another person is on his or her shoulders. Juries are there to decide “guilty” or “not guilty” based on the facts and evidence presented. This paper will

This is the reason there is a tighter procedure when storing evidence into Criminal Justice field. The improperly investigated case caused the defendant to feel as if the due process clauses were not executed. After careful research it has been proven that the due process clause is not required determining an innocent or guilty plea which ultimately saves a lot of the court’s time when dealing with a defendant. Lastly, Modern technology has a very important position in society today. Even though the assault kit was used to verify if a victim was raped, a better rape kit was invented to not only verify the victim who was assaulted, but also identify the criminal as well.

Why are people always convicted on something they only have circumstantial evidence on? I believe that there is many more ways for a jury to find out if a person is guilty or not and circumstantial evidence is one of the main things they use. Most of the time people get blamed for something they didn’t do and they don’t even have all the evidence to prove that one is guilty. So then they end up going to jail for a crime they did not commit.

Since the stakes are so high in these cases, there is a high burden of proof on the prosecution. The prosecution must prove the defendant’s guilt “beyond

But our knowledge of the frequency of wrongful convictions is inevitably limited. The criminal standard of proof is demanding, but absolute certainty is unachievable and not required (Hammer 2014). Some risk of

The principle in law that one is innocent until proven guilty has created much discourse. There are those who feel that the moment that one is arrested, there is reasonable belief that they committed the crime. However, there are those who feel that just as the principle states, one is, and should be taken as a victim and the outcome could be either way: guilty or not guilty. In fact, this argument is supported by the many cases of malicious prosecutions and mistaken identities.

Unfortunately, in this case the prosecution did a poor job on linking all evidence to Casey Anthony that proved she murdered her daughter. The prosecution ignored a single plain legitimate notion “Corpus Delicti” requirement and due to that failure of addressing it the jury was forced to give a “not guilty” verdict from the beginning of the

The most essential part of our judicial system is that it is based on the presumption that the accused is innocent unless proven guilty beyond doubt. Also it is better that ten guilty are held free than one innocent being falsely implicated in a case. Thus the burden of proof in a criminal case is very high.

Nicole’s Murder According to Simpson & Haven, the murder of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman was a shock to the nation, but what was more appalling is the fact that O.J. Simpson was the one on trial for those murders. The authorities were more concerned of the victims’ rights were being neglected (Simpson & Haven, 2008). This paper will expose Nicole Simpson first time reporting intimate violence to the authorities long before her death. I will also examine stalking and intimate violence, victim rights as well as protection provided by the regulation and how it pertains to the case of Nicole Simpson.

(Miladinovic, Z., & Lukassen, J., 2015, February 25) The outcome of a just trial and its verdict, is based on proof of evidence, which ensures what 's best for the

2.The impact on the Charter-protected interests of the accused (was the conduct very invasive towards the accused and the protected right). 3.Society's interest in an adjudication of the case on its merits (how substantial is the evidence to Crown’s case). The inclusion of the third factor was deemed important because the Court ruled that exclusion of evidence that led to an acquittal would throw the administration of justice into disrepute in the eyes of the public.

The mens rea is the mental element of an offence. It refers to the mental state of the accused in terms of the offence. If no mens rea is present the accused cannot be convicted with the exception of absolute or strict liability. In order for a person to be guilty of a specific crime it is expected that the defendant has the necessary mens rea.(4) ‘Intention means the conscious objective or purpose of the accused.’(1) Intention is not the same as motive or desire to achieve a particular result.

Mens rea is the element of a crime which alludes to what is known as the “guilty mind”. The case of R v Mohan [1976] QB 1 , the case dealing with the meaning of intention in the context of the offence of murder, James LJ clarified that intention meant ‘aim’ or ‘a decision to bring about a certain consequence’ whilst mens rea is generally related with motive what it more directly links to the notion of intention. There are two types of intention, direct intention and oblique intention .Oblique intention is difficult for a jury to infer and difficult for a prosecutor to prove. Defining mens rea of intention precisely is very difficult over the years.

The prosecution bears the legal burden to prove the guilt of defendant beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases whereby the defendant bears the evidential burden

Mens rea is criminal intent or a guilty state of mind and is the mental aspect of the crime being committed. This is limited to intentional or purposeful action or in action and is not an accident. The fifth element of the crime is causation (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Causation is a casual relationship between the legally forbidden harm and the actus reus. What this is to prevent people from having a delay or threat of criminal charges the rest of their life.