Beyond A Reasonable Doubt

The phrase “Beyond a reasonable doubt” refers to the standard of proof commonly observed and required in courts of law for it to established that a defendant on trial committed the criminal offense of which he or she is accused. The presence of reasonable doubt, as can also be identified as the shadow of a doubt (though this definition is somewhat more demanding) can be used to argue that the prosecution has not sufficiently proved its case to the jury. The requirement for the guiltiness of defendants to be proved “beyond a reasonable doubt” is an element of the principle that the burden of proof in criminal cases should be shouldered by prosecutors. The requirement for reasonable doubt can be further understood in this way as a means for assuring the civil rights of criminal defendants. In that both the administering judge and the prosecutor will be government employees, “reasonable doubt” requirements are for judicial fairness.

Trial Laws has more information on court proceedings throughout the U.S.