I haven't followed this Scooter Libby trial much at all, except that it looks like someone screwed up maybe by direction and regardless, the sordid tale of twist and deception began to unravel quite publicly as a result of this alleged screwup.
Anyway, the headline "Libby Jurors: Define 'Reasonable Doubt'" caught my eye. Particularly because the definition of reasonable doubt is pretty fluid, I just wanted to see if and how they could clarify an answer to this question. Not surprisingly, the article did not go into this at all.
The short answer to this question is that it will probably be something the jury will have to figure out by themselves. For you non-lawyer types, I will give you a couple of answers I have heard during closing arguments that seem to illustrate what exactly is "reasonable doubt."
For civil trials, the burden the plaintiff has to show is called "preponderance of the evidence." Put simply, this is essentially a 51% burden. For criminal trials, the burden is on the state to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, which doesn't have a percentage, but we know it's something more than 51% and something less than 100% (absolute guilt). Using a football field to illustrate, you could argue that the civil burden means the plaintiff has to reach just beyond the 50 yard line, and reasonable doubt puts you somewhere in probable field goal range, but it doesn't mean you have to score a touchdown.
Another analogy I have heard is akin to putting a puzzle together. You don't have to put the entire puzzle together to know what it is, just most of it. If you can figure out what the puzzle is, then the state has met its burden of reasonable doubt.
Of course, these are just a couple of very general illustrations for a very abstract thing and may not necessarily be how you would hear it in the courtroom. If the jury is asking about reasonable doubt, then I'm guessing they must be close to field goal range, but not quite. Maybe a few more days of deliberation will determine if they think they can kick the field goal and win, or punt it off and let another jury worry about it.
Friday, March 02, 2007
Libby jurors want a definition of "reasonable doubt"
Tags:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment