Burden and Standard of Proof

Student’s Name:
Professor’s Name:
Course:
Date:
The Burden Of Proof and Standard of Proof
These two sets of proof decide which party should prove what and the extent to which they should prove the matter. In a case, both criminal or civil, one of the parties always has the “the burden.” This implies that this party has to prove their case in front of the jury or judge (Taylor et al). For instance, the prosecution in a criminal case has the obligation of proving that the defendant committed the offence. It is every person’s constitutional right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty; this implies that the state has the burden of providing evidence to support the accusations. On the other hand, the standard of proof entails the degree towards which the side with the responsibility has to offer evidence of their case (Botteman, Yves). High staked cases have high standards of proof.
Criminal cases are meant to prosecute felons while civil trials are necessary for presiding over two private parties in disagreement with each other (Clark, John, et al.). Therefore, the two types of cases have different burdens and standards of proof. For criminal cases, the prosecutor has to prove that the defendant is guilty “beyond reasonable doubt”. A conviction will only be made if the accused undoubtedly committed the crime. Conversely, in civil cases, a party has to provide substantial evidence to back up their theory; no reasonable doubt is necessary as it is, the highest standard. Another difference is, the defendant in a criminal case cannot drop the charges (that is, they are not participants to the case); only the DA can, while in a civil trial a plaintiff can drop the charges.

This case study does not qualify as a criminal case because the hospital is being sued for negligence. The people responsible for taking care of Mr B are not on trial hence it is a civil case. The outcome of the hearing might not lead to jail term but rather compensation to Mrs F.

Works Cited
Botteman, Yves. “Mergers, standard of proof and expert economic evidence.” Journal of Competition Law and Economics 2.1 (2006): 71-100.
Taylor, John E., Carrie Sturts Dossick, and Michael Garvin. “Meeting the burden of proof with case-study research.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 137.4 (2010): 303-311.
Clark, John, et al. “Five factor model personality traits, jury selection, and case outcomes in criminal and civil cases.” Criminal Justice and Behavior 34.5 (2007): 641-660.