Eli5 – How can someone be proven not guilty of murder in criminal court but still sued in civil court?
In: 19
I just don’t like the comments I’ve read thus far. Criminal courts establish facts that are “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which is the highest standard of proof. So if you’re guilty in a criminal court, you are established guilty under the highest standard of evidence. Civil suits use “preponderance of the evidence,” which simply means more likely than not (I.e. 51% or better). So if something is established in civil court, it’s merely under that standard. Someone can be found not guilty in criminal court where there is a “reasonable doubt,” but found liable in civil court where it’s more likely than not they are guilty. On the flip side if someone is guilty in criminal court they are automatically liable in civil court, as it’s already been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is a higher standard than preponderance of the evidence.
Criminal courts don’t prove that you aren’t guilty. They either prove that you *are* guilty or they let you go. And you have to be *really* sure. Beyond *reasonable doubt*. 99% or more sure. Any arguments for their innocence need to be so out there that if you heard someone say that happened in discussion, you’d need to see it to believe it.
Civil courts don’t work that way. To win in civil court, you have to show only a *preponderance of the evidence*. Which is basically “more likely than not”. 51%.
So if the evidence shows someone *probably* did it (75%, say), a criminal court will say Not Guilty, but a civil court will rule against you.
Certain things flip this around. Arguments like Self-Defense require the defendant prove innocence in criminal court, beyond reasonable doubt. But generally, if you are charged in criminal court, you need not prove anything. The prosecutor has to do all the proving.
Latest Answers