Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Quantifying Burdens of Proof

A View from the Bench, the Jury, and the Classroom

Bibliographic Data

ID4085696
AuthorsRita James Simon, Linda Mahan
Year1971
Volume5
Issue3
Pages319-330
Publication date1971-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLaw & Society Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0023-9216 • E-ISSN: 1540-5893
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/3052837
OpenAlexW2332094122
LanguageEN
Citations received30
References cited1

This paper is the third in a series of articles describing the results of efforts to investigate ways in which the burdens of proof applicable in criminal and civil trials could be defined more precisely and more objectively. The burden of proof for determining guilt in criminal trials in American courts is the presentation of evidence which would lead "a reasonable man" to believe "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the defendant did indeed commit the act for which he was charged. This standard is applicable to all criminal acts irrespective of their heinousness or the circumstances under which they were committed. In civil actions the burden of proof necessary for determining negligence on the part of the defendant is "by preponderance of the evidence

Burden of proof · Civil procedure · Commit · Criminal case · Criminal trial · Criminology · Political science · Presentation (obstetrics · Reasonable Doubt · Computer Science · Criminal Law and Evidence · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Legal processes and jurisprudence · Medicine · Psychology

  • What social science teaches us about the jury instruction process

    Joel D Lieberman, Bruce D Sales•Psychology Public Policy and Law•1997

  • Pretrial publicity

    Christina A Studebaker, Steven D Penrod et al.•Psychology Public Policy and Law•1997

  • Models of jury decision making

    Steven Penrod, Reid Hastie•Psychological Bulletin•1979

  • Justice needs a new blindfold

    Kathleen C Gerbasi, Kathleen Gerbasi et al.•Psychological Bulletin•1977

  • The ecological validity of jury simulations

    Brian H Bornstein•Law and Human Behavior•1999

  • Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation

    Robert J Maccoun, Norbert L Kerr•Journal of Personality and Social…•1988

  • Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt

    Norbert L Kerr, Et Al et al.•Journal of Personality and Social…•1976

  • On the requirements of proof

    Saul M Kassin, Lawrence S Wrightsman•Journal of Personality and Social…•1979

  • Lifting the Veil

    Open Access•Emily Finch, Vanessa E Munro•Journal of Law and Society•2008

  • After Division, Before Decision

    Norbert L Kerr, Barbara L Watts et al.•Social Psychology Quarterly•1982

  • The civil standard of proof—what is it, actually

    Open Access•Mark Schweizer•The International Journal of…•2016

  • The threshold lies in the method

    Open Access•Federico Picinali•The International Journal of…•2015

  • The standard of proof and crime prevention

    Open Access•Ezequiel Malarino•The International Journal of…•2024

  • The beyond a reasonable doubt standard of proof

    Open Access•Olivia K H Smith•The International Journal of…•2022

  • Towards a (Bayesian) Convergence

    Open Access•Richard D Friedman•The International Journal of…•1997

  • A guaranteed right to trial by jury at state level

    Anthony Gray•Australian Journal of Human Rights•2009

  • Methodological issues in legal communication research

    Gerald R Miller, Norman E Fontes et al.•Communication Monographs•1983

  • Does the structure of the evidence base “cause” verdicts of guilty and innocent

    Michael P Ryan, Richard R Hurtig•Discourse Processes•1980

  • Tolerated contests? Plea and sentence in the Victorian magistrates' courts

    Open Access•Roger Douglas•Journal of Criminal Justice•1988

  • Grave doubts about “reasonable doubt”

    Open Access•Craig Hemmens, Kathryn E Scarborough et al.•Journal of Criminal Justice•1997

  • Severity of prescribed penalty and mock jurors' verdicts

    Norbert L Kerr•Journal of Personality and Social…•1978

  • The American Trial Jury on Trial

    Open Access•Lawrence S Wrightsman•Journal of Social Issues•1978

  • Two Meanings of ‘Reasonableness’

    Open Access•Federico Picinali•Modern Law Review•2013

  • Racializing scripts of deficiency

    Open Access•Jessica López‐espino•Latino Studies•2025

  • Best Evidence

    Open Access•Yonatan Lupu•International Organization•2013

  • Jury decision making

    Dennis J Devine, Laura D Clayton et al.•Psychology Public Policy and Law•2001

  • "The conflict between precision and flexibility in explaining "beyond a reasonable doubt

    Elisabeth Stoffelmayr, Shari Seidman Diamond•Psychology Public Policy and Law•2000

  • Trial by Jury

    Open Access•John Baldwin, M Mcconville•Law & Society Review•1979

  • Jury Size and Verdict Consistency

    Open Access•Robert T Roper•Law & Society Review•1980

  • Role Playing and the Study of Jury Behavior

    Open Access•Norbert L Kerr, David R Nerenz et al.•Sociological Methods & Research•1979

Unique citing works30
Citations per year0,6
Citation span1976 - 2025 (50)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 26
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae