If the court system says you are innocent until proven guilty why is a not guilty verdict the same as innocent?

Answer

It is as is said "in the eye of the beholder." Depending upon the circumstances a "not guilty" verdict could mean that there wasn't enough evidence to convict the person on trial. There's a pretty famous trial that supports that premise. What it comes down to is what people choose to believe. Was the person innocent or did they just "get away with it."

Answer

A jury is not being asked to determine if the defendant is factually innocent, they are only being asked to determine if the prosecutor met the burden of proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That is higher than the burden of proof in a civil case, which is usually a preponderance.

In most states, the court will conduct a preliminary hearing to determine if there is enough evidence to conduct a trial. In many states, that means that a judge has already determined that it is more likely than not that the defendant committed the crime.

In my opinion, O.J. Simpson got awary with murder. But a second jury in a wrongful death lawsuit held him responsible and awarded millions of dollars in damages. Two different juries, two different burdens of proof, two different results.

• Does the Ontario Provincial Police really have the jurisdiction to issue traffic violation tickets on Highway 407 when it is a privately owned highway?
• Statue of limitations south carolina?
• Is it illegal to use a companies name and logo in your advertising with a verbal contract?