1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
V125BC [204]
2 years ago
6

Do you think defendants should have to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to be convicted? Or do you think a lesser burde

n of proof, like the preponderance of evidence in needed in civil cases, is more appropriate?
Law
1 answer:
BigorU [14]2 years ago
5 0

I think defendants should have to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to be convicted is more appropriate.

<h3>Who is a Defendant?</h3>

This is referred to as the individual or group which have been accused of breaking the law and is being tried in court.

It is more appropriate for the defendants to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to be convicted because the jury will employ  the use of evidences and testimonies in other to give a verdict. This ensures fair judgement and prevent innocent from being punished unjustly.

Read more about Defendant here brainly.com/question/7315287

#SPJ1

You might be interested in
The husband says: “I know what I’m doing. Its not my first time.” Why is his arugment a generalization?
marysya [2.9K]

Answer:

because he doesnt specify what he's doing or how many times he's done it

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Do you believe that there are too many lawsuits in the United States? If so, do you place more blame for the problem on lawyers
Phoenix [80]

Answer:

do a protest

Explanation:

4 0
4 years ago
How did Jim Crow laws affect African Americans?
Shtirlitz [24]
Kept African Americans socially inferior to white Americans
5 0
3 years ago
Ayudenme por fis
Rudik [331]
No español sorryy so yea
6 0
3 years ago
Which of the following is an absolute defense to defamation?a. The statement is trueb. The statement was said on private propert
Andrews [41]

Answer:

<em>The answers are letter A </em>

Explanation:

<em>Because when you claim that the stament is true there is no defamation. In criminal cases, if a person was conviccted by homicide, you cannot defame that person  by telling people that fact, because it is public knowledge. However, if it is a civil case, the truth must be shown by the written evidence.</em>

<em>The other defenses are: there must be harm, communication, given consent, privilege or immunity can be claimed, and if the defense proves that it is only an opinion and not a statement. These are the defense ways to neutralize a defamation accusation.</em>

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What does the FBI do?
    10·2 answers
  • Which of these is a common feature of market economies?
    5·1 answer
  • Mengapa kebebasan beragama berhubungan dengan hak asasi manusia (ham)? Sebutkan dan jelaskan!
    12·1 answer
  • Structured fines are presumed to be fairer than tariff fines because tariff fines are
    9·2 answers
  • What if the defendant later admits that they did in fact kill the victim. Are they getting away with murder or could there be an
    13·1 answer
  • Your friend wears earbuds while driving to school each day is this safe is it legal why or why not
    9·2 answers
  • If emergency vehicles are responding to an emergency, you need to
    7·2 answers
  • There are 7 Army Values (LDRSHIP which the acronym stands for Leadership, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Integrity, Personal C
    11·1 answer
  • The First Amendment protects citizens' right to:
    5·1 answer
  • Most of the work of the attorney general involves ________ rather than ________. Multiple Choice ceremonial functions; executive
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!