Evidence Law: Burden of Proof and Standard in Criminal and Civil Cases, Lecture notes of Law

Download Evidence Law: Burden of Proof and Standard in Criminal and Civil Cases and more Lecture notes Law in PDF only on Docsity! Introduction to evidence law: Proof: Who is obligated to introduce evidence in court? • Prosecutor or accused (criminal cases); • Plaintiff or defendant (civil cases) The evidential burden • The sufficiency of evidence introduced to prove a claim. The legal burden (or standard of proof) o The persuasiveness of the evidence Evidential Burden: The party who makes the claim must provide sufficient evidence that supports it. • In a criminal trial, the prosecution must bring evidence that has the potential to prove every element of the crime in order for the judge or jury to consider the question of guilt. • The judge determines whether the evidentiary burden was met (if a “no case” submission was made by the defense.) Legal Burden: The persuasiveness of the evidence • In a criminal trial, the persuasiveness of the evidence relates to the arguments made by the prosecution – is the evidence presented strong and persuasive enough to prove the case? • Decided by the jury (or judge if there is no jury.) • The persuasiveness of the evidence is linked with the standard of proof – for example, in a criminal trial, is the evidence presented by the Crown persuasive enough to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt? Whose burden is it? (Criminal Proceedings): The Prosecution: • In criminal proceedings, it is usually the prosecution that must discharge both the evidential burden and the legal burden. 1. The prosecution must introduce sufficient evidence to support each element of the alleged crime. 2. If the evidential burden is met, the judge will allow the evidence to be considered by the jury. 3. The jury will decide whether or not the legal burden has been satisfied by the prosecution. The Defence: • The general rule is that the defence does not have to prove anything. Why? • Exceptions: 1. Insanity plea - shifts both evidentiary and legal burdens to the defence. 2. Defences - self-defence, provocation, duress - shift only the evidentiary burden to the defence à the prosecution has to convince the jury that the evidence is not persuasive. Whose burden is it? (Civil Proceedings): • The evidential and legal burden are upon the party making a claim (the plaintiff) or the party making a defence (the defendant). Standard of Proof: An argument about a fact in issue is considered persuasive if it satisfies the standard of proof (Evidence Act Sections 140-142). In criminal cases: • “Beyond reasonable doubt” (Prosecution); • “Balance of probabilities” (Defence). In civil cases: • “Balance of probabilities” “Beyond Reasonable Doubt”: How certain should one be to satisfy the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard? • “A reasonable doubt is a doubt which the particular jury entertain in the circumstances” (Green v The Queen (1971) 126 CLR 28) • “An imaginary or fanciful doubt or an unreal possibility is not a ‘reasonable doubt’” (section 64 of the Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic)). Presumptions: Presumptions of law operate to shift the burden of proof: • Presumptions of law are rules of evidence that affect how a fact in issue is proved. A presumption of law operates so that when a fact—the ‘basic fact’—is proved, it must, in the absence of further evidence, lead to a conclusion that another fact—the ‘presumed fact’— exists. • Can you find examples of presumptions in the Evidence Act? What is their effect?