General Discussion

gollygee

(22,336 posts)

4. It's not even the only legal principle

Tue Nov 21, 2017, 02:49 PM

Nov 2017

For instance in civil cases, the standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence, which makes more sense outside of a criminal case. No one should go to jail unless something is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but people have to be held accountable for their actions as well. To use the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard for every consequence someone could possibly face for any act would keep most people from being held accountable for anything. I imagine that's why our legal system only uses "beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal cases.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

65 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Have we abandoned the principle of Innocent until prove Guilty? [View all] Trumpocalypse Nov 2017 OP

Yes. NT enough Nov 2017 #1

It seems to be the case GatoGordo Nov 2017 #2

They cannot tymorial Nov 2017 #31

It is weaponization of a real issue moda253 Nov 2017 #33

Well said! Rhiannon12866 Nov 2017 #37

Hear hear! defacto7 Nov 2017 #52

There's no doubt in my mind that we're being played. crosinski Nov 2017 #59

Exactly. And when this happens enough times? kcr Nov 2017 #60

Who has lost their job so far based on flimsy evidence? Kaleva Nov 2017 #3

+1 itsrobert Nov 2017 #14

It's not even the only legal principle gollygee Nov 2017 #4

Never said 'beyond a reasonable doubt" Trumpocalypse Nov 2017 #7

Not even slightly gollygee Nov 2017 #8

That's rather odd considering Al apologized to his first accuser TexasBushwhacker Nov 2017 #15

I've read it here gollygee Nov 2017 #20

No. I don't think he should resign either. N/t TexasBushwhacker Nov 2017 #38

Here Trumpocalypse Nov 2017 #29

I hadn't read those gollygee Nov 2017 #32

I don't think he admitted to anything other than being part of a bad joke. moda253 Nov 2017 #35

The inappropriate joke is the "some of this" I was talking about gollygee Nov 2017 #64

Yes CatMor Nov 2017 #5

Innocent til proven guilty is not a real thing Not Ruth Nov 2017 #6

not familiar with the intricacies of either, but isn't some evidence required? unblock Nov 2017 #11

DWI Not Ruth Nov 2017 #30

This guy beat the gun laws by claiming to be stupid Not Ruth Nov 2017 #34

not to defend that law (because it's ridiculously draconian and easily abused), unblock Nov 2017 #36

Yes, it is a "legal thing," and it's called "presumption of innocence." n/t pnwmom Nov 2017 #39

Yes, it's a legal principle. cloudbase Nov 2017 #9

The principle applies to the legal system mcar Nov 2017 #10

The ones losing their jobs have admitted bad behavior ksoze Nov 2017 #12

Many admitted bad behaviors Igel Nov 2017 #47

No. johnp3907 Nov 2017 #13

public images can be ethereal, based on smoke and mirrors, gone in a small breeze. unblock Nov 2017 #16

Of course it's not consistent. Igel Nov 2017 #48

Have we abandoned the ability to recognize a court sentence from an opinion on the internet LanternWaste Nov 2017 #17

Did Charlie Rose get charged with something? maxsolomon Nov 2017 #18

It's a bad precedent. Igel Nov 2017 #49

nope, and if someone is falsely accused.... steve2470 Nov 2017 #19

But that flies in the face of the mantra that "these women should be believed". Just think how OnDoutside Nov 2017 #22

yes you are correct steve2470 Nov 2017 #24

Yes, 100% OnDoutside Nov 2017 #26

False dichotomy gollygee Nov 2017 #25

That's the way it certainly should work but the frenzy at the moment OnDoutside Nov 2017 #41

I believe who I believe and I don't who I don't. Iggo Nov 2017 #55

We'll that's reassuring. OnDoutside Nov 2017 #57

This isn't about a criminal or even civil trial frazzled Nov 2017 #21

Funny you should say that since you were backing Gillibrand saying Clinton should've resigned brush Nov 2017 #23

Trial by Social Media! You are gulity until the next thing comes along. FSogol Nov 2017 #27

You make a good point Panho Nov 2017 #28

It's a requirement from the governments viewpoint fescuerescue Nov 2017 #40

So no evidence is required. Trumpocalypse Nov 2017 #45

correct. fescuerescue Nov 2017 #50

Explains Trump supporters Trumpocalypse Nov 2017 #53

I have never adhered to that policy in my personal life. NCTraveler Nov 2017 #42

It is called the court of public opinion and we have a right to our opinions. Irish_Dem Nov 2017 #43

That's more or less what I said on another post. How do guys prove it if they didn't do it. He said blueinredohio Nov 2017 #44

Who has lost their job because of flimsy evidence of sexual misbehaviour? Kaleva Nov 2017 #46

I didn't say anything about losing their job blueinredohio Nov 2017 #63

The OP did and you more or less agreed with it. Kaleva Nov 2017 #65

I think Moore has been more than proven guilty. Joe941 Nov 2017 #51

Last time I checked, it's still going strong in our courts. Iggo Nov 2017 #54

Two words: Her emails marylandblue Nov 2017 #56

You asked us as a group, and that's difficult. crosinski Nov 2017 #58

Not in the courts, but for all other purposes treestar Nov 2017 #61

IMO, the evidence isnt so flimsy. I guarantee these various companies NYC Liberal Nov 2017 #62