Universal Declaration Of Human Rights

855 Words4 Pages
The14th Amendment guarantees every American the right to life, liberty or property; including the right to a fair trial. Everyone born in the United States or any naturalized citizen has the right to be considered not guilty according to the law. Most of us have heard the term “innocent until proven guilty”; this basic notion is a part of the United States justice system, initially incorporated in the Bill of Rights to ensure all citizens receive a fair trial if charged with a crime; known as due process of law. Ultimately, the 1st amendment protects these rights; however, the 14th amendment imposes the Bill of Rights on the states, ensuring that states never unfairly limit the rights of Americans ("Fifth Amendment Right Against Self-Incrimination…show more content…
Arguably, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a benchmark chronicle in the history of human rights; the Declaration was drafted and declared by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on December 10, 1948 as an all-inclusive standard of rights for all people and nations. It sets out, for the first time, the fundamental human rights to be universally protected. Ensuring all people everywhere have the same human rights such as freedom, justice and peace in the world which no one can take away. As a result, this Declaration affirms the dignity and worth of all people, and the equal rights of women and men. Article 11, the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty states you should be considered innocent until it is proven to the contrary in a fair trial in which all the guarantees necessary for defense have been secured. Furthermore, you can’t be punished for doing something that was not considered a crime at the time you did…show more content…
United States was presented to the Supreme Court in 1895 establishing the presumption of innocence of those accused of a crime. Francis A. Coffin and Percival B. Coffin, were charged with aiding and abetting the former president of the Indianapolis National Bank, in bank fraud ("Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 (1895)"). All things considered, it is a very convoluted case with a total of 50 indictment counts. The 44th count stated: "The law presumes that persons charged with a crime are innocent until they are proven by competent evidence to be guilty." As a matter of fact, the 44th count was dismissed as inadequate by the lower court in its instruction to the jury. However, they did instruct the jury that "Before you can find the defendants guilty you must be certain of his guilt as charged on the counts of the indictment beyond a reasonable doubt." Ironically, the lower court then prepped the jury extensively on the principle of reasonable doubt and how it relates to evidence (Knappman, Edward W). By and large, the appeal of the case to the Supreme Court was rooted in part on the lower court 's refusal to allow the 44th count. Ultimately, their task was to decide whether the lower court had violated the defendants ' rights by not instructing the jury on the presumption of innocence, assuming that reasonable doubt was fundamentally the same as presumption of innocence. What is reasonable doubt? Evidence that is beyond reasonable doubt is the standard of
Open Document