Reasonable doubt

of evidence that the court accepted as plausible. Preponderance of evidence is different from beyond a reasonable doubt because with preponderance, the evidence does not directly point to one person or another based on the amount of incriminating evidence against said person; the preponderance of evidence points to the more probable truth based on the evidence, but not beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also based their ruling on the fact that had this crime been committed by an adult, the…

The case of In re Gault is significant in that it changed how juveniles are viewed and treated in the juvenile justice system. The fact that children were property and had no rights subjected them to sometimes cruel and harsh punishments for extended periods of time. I agree with the court’s decision that this type of justice was not providing any rehabilitation, but rather harsh penalties for what would be considered citational or misdemeanor adult offenses. In re Gault played a major role…

some reasoning behind his vote and actually use his mentality in this risk taking decision. The next three paragraphs state how the 8th Juror is a hero by Standing alone to his beliefs and reasonable doubt and voting not guilty in the secret ballot also about how Juror #8 took some thought into his reasonable doubt and studying the testimonies and evidence and how he then changed the minds of 11 jurors in voting not guilty. Juror #8 stood alone at first he was the…

In the given scenario the burden of proof and its parts were are all addressed in some way or another. The levels include a hunch, reasonable suspicion, probable cause, prima facie evidence, and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. For instance, the police had a hunch when they heard the description of the suspect. They were told that the robber was a white male, in his 20s and of the average body type. This could describe almost half of the male population, but somehow this gave the police the…

charges. The judge clearly instructs the jury that whatever decision they should make could greatly affect the defendant’s life. Among the 12 judges, 11 of them vote guilty for the defendant but juror number 8 (Fonda) disagrees with them citing reasonable doubt and considering the defendant’s ghetto lifestyle. Fonda attempts to convince the fellow jurors of his point of view claiming the boy has a right to a fair hearing (12 Angry Men). Unlike in most movies where the judge is on the spotlight,…

state disproved beyond a reasonable doubt the defendants claim of self-defense? The court held that the defender acted in self-defense. “A person is justified in the use of deadly force…

Most people associate the Liebeck v. McDonald’s case, better known as “the hot coffee lawsuit,” with the very worst of our justice system, frivolous actions brought by greedy plaintiffs with the hopes of winning the lawsuit lottery. However, it’s one thing to hear and another thing to see. Everybody knows, or they think they know the McDonald’s case. Although, the documentary “Hot Coffee” shows how people had wrong perceptions. Just merely hearing the sentence that a lady sued McDonald’s for 2.9…

Amendment's assurance against preposterous hunts and seizures. Under Fourth Amendment case law, a protected Search and Seizure must be founded on Probable Cause. A stop and search were normally directed on the premise of sensible doubt, a to some degree bring down standard than reasonable…

act refers to the specific acts performed by a defendant in carrying out a crime. Criminal intent is often referred to as the mens rea, which is the Latin term for ‘‘guilty mind.’’ For most crimes, the prosecution must prove ‘‘beyond a reasonable doubt’’ that the defendant intended to commit the crime for which the defendant has been charged. In practical terms, a person’s ‘‘intent’’ relates to that person’s state of mind while performing an accompanying…

essay, I stated that the jury would find defendant Rebekah Ponder guilty of the murder of Walter White, and would find the defendant Elshaday Yilma complicit. Also, I claimed that evidence would be found insufficient for the jury or an otherwise reasonable person to convict either defendant of robbery. Ultimately, my prediction was not far off from the actual decisions made by the jury. After analyzing the evidence put before them by the prosecution and both defense teams, the jury found Rebekah…