Being Convinced Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
Criminal Cases Are Much Different Than Civil Cases
By Corey Sipe, published Apr 14, 2007
Published Content: 741 Total Views: 375,611 Favorited By: 4 CPs
Embed:
Editor's Note: This is part four in an ongoing series profiling the Citizens Police Academy course sponsored by the Old Saybrook Police Department. OLD SAYBROOK - While juries are told by judges to only find a defendant guilty if they are convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt" of his or her guilt, many do not completely understand what the rights are of the defendant and the plaintiff.
Howard Gould, President Elect of the Middlesex County Bar Association, serves as a defense attorney at the Middlesex Superior Court and serves as an attorney for the law firm Gould and Gillin P.C.
While Gould said in a civil case, the rules for a plaintiff and defendant are almost identical; a criminal case is much different.
In a civil case, whoever has 51 percent of the evidence wins, Gould said, adding that in a criminal case, there must be "beyond a reasonable doubt" for the accused to be convicted.
"It's the possibility that someone guilty of a crime will be deprived of their liberty and are going to jail," Gould said, adding that much care must be taken before someone is convicted.
In a criminal case, the plaintiff is the state, who has the burden to show a jury that the defendant, in fact, committed the crime which is no easy task, Gould said.
"A lot of defendants go out of their way to ensure there is no evidence or witnesses," Gould said.
In same ways, Gould said, the state must play "fair" in ways a defendant usually is not required to do.
For example, the state must divulge all information that could show the defendant is innocent.
Failure to do this, Gould said, could mean case could be appealed and thrown out.
A defense attorney representing the defendant could have evidence showing the defendant is guilty but has no obligation to turn that over to the prosecution.
"The basic reason is that under the Constitution, a person doesn't have to incriminate themselves," Gould said, referring to the Fifth Amendment.
Gould, however, admitted that many criminals are caught by police because they do "strange things" or admit guilt.
More by Corey Sipe
- Transforming Highway Service Plazas in Connecticut: Expanded Services on the Way Following Mobil Pul...
- New Director Takes Reins at Hepburn Theater in Old Saybrook, Connecticut
- Group Will Review Town Assessment Procedures in Westbrook, Connecticut
- The Shack Restaurant in East Lyme, CT Serves Up a Delicious Breakfast
Being Convinced Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
You may also like...
- Reasonable Doubt from a Juror's Perspective
- Civil & Criminal Court Cases: The Differences
- Is There Reasonable Doubt for an American Gangster?
- Jury in "Scooter" Libby Trial Asks for Definition of "Reasonable Doubt"
- Is There Reasonable Doubt for an American Gangster?
- Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Pistons Ink Evans
- Key Acts, Cases, and Concepts in American Antitrust History
- Plea Bargaining in the Criminal Justice System: Who is Really Benefiting?
- How to Get Free Online Criminal and Summary Records in Oklahoma
- How to Get Online Free Criminal Records in Connecticut
Comments
Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Most Commented On

