Robert Blake Acquitted

[Shawn]

You have to remember how hard it is to convict a person. That sounds foolish, but the system depends on the fact that 90% of people simply plead guilty. If the number of people who fight the charges rose even 10% there would be chaos. [it's why you always hear those nasty no-goodniks advise you to fight your traffic tickets.] For whatever reason though, the number stays at about 10%.

For the few that do maintain their innocence, especially for a murder, the standard of proof is pretty stringent. The jury has to believe that, given all of the facts, the accused did it.

Not:

- could have done it

- likely did it

- might have done it

- had reason to do it

- wanted to do it

The jury has to be convinced that the evidence says he did do it. It's actually a tough jump.

---

One prof this year pointed out that the stringent requirement that society places on the the standard of proof, out of respect for the right to freedom, leaves many shaking their heads when looking at the courts.

I.e For a Tort [suing] case, the standard of proof is that, on the balance of probabilities the person likely caused the damages he/she is being sued for. The accused can be found liable a lot easier than they would be found to be criminally guilty. Thus in Cases like O.J. the criminal guilt seemed likely but not certain, but that likelihood was enough to find him liable in the later lawsuit.

--

Though as of this moment I'm still 2 years from completion, I'm thinking strongly about become a prosecutor.

[Kooperman]

Most good defense attorneys start as prosecutors, don't they?

[Shawn]

I've heard such.

[Kooperman]

Thus in Cases like O.J. the criminal guilt seemed likely but not certain, but that likelihood was enough to find him liable in the later lawsuit.

The way the glove in evidence was mishandled by Chris Darden and Marsha Clark cost them that case.