how to explain reasonable doubt to a jury

Once again, the defendant does not have to prove that he or she is not liable. In a civil trial, the plaintiff has the burden of proof, and generally must prove liability by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., the greater weight of the evidence.) The degree of proof required in a civil case is far less stringent than in a criminal case. The defendant does not need to prove his or her innocence-the burden is on the government. In a criminal trial, the burden of proof rests with the government, which must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.

Either lawyer may choose not to present an opening statement.

In some states, the defense may reserve its opening statement until the end of the plaintiff's or government's case. The defense lawyer follows with his or her opening statement. This is the party that brought the case to court-the government in a criminal prosecution or the plaintiff in a civil case-and has to prove its case in order to prevail. The trial begins with the opening statement of the party with the burden of proof. The opening statements must be confined to facts that will be proved by the evidence, and cannot be argumentative. That means when evidence is presented in a criminal case, the prosecution has to prove each element of the case beyond a reasonable doubt in the minds of the. It is not required that the government prove guilt beyond all. The purpose of opening statements by each side is to tell jurors something about the case they will be hearing. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced the defendant is guilty.

How to explain reasonable doubt to a jury