Burden of Proof in Criminal Proceedings
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ส.ค. 2024
- This short capsule explains why the Crown has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, what that term means, and what happens when the accused has a "reverse onus" to prove some aspect of his or her defence.
To learn more about the criminal law and evidence, check out my website: petersankoff.com
To be notified about new videos, Like my Facebook page: / professorsankoff
IF THESE VIDEOS HAVE HELPED YOU, PLEASE SHARE THEM WITH OTHERS. MY GOAL IS TO ASSIST STUDENTS AND LAWYERS LEARN MORE ABOUT THESE TOPICS.
Also, please consider leaving a comment, or letting me know how these have helped on my website.
The 'proof' part of "burden of proof" has lost it's meaning when proof=evidence and then evidence=testimony. What I'm trying to say is that nothing can ever truly be proven on a complainant's statement alone, yet Crowns win convictions every day with this poor standard our criminal courts have been reduced to.
Thank you! Those videos are helping me refresh my mind. I am newly a lawyer and I feel it is important to go over all those principles again.
Fascinating how much I relate to this even as a South African. Difference is the the presumption of innocence is Constitutionally entrenched. Even though there's some statutes that create a reverse onus on the accussed when tested against the Constitution they fail (seldom justifiable) because " This Constitution is the supreme law of the Republic; law or conduct inconsistent with it is invalid"
Your explanations are amazing! Good job, and thanks for your videos. Very full and explanatory, clear.
Ok! I will. Where did you go to law school? I'm guessing you're canadian trained
Nice checked out ur profile!! I went to Uottawa's fauteux as an exchange law student from France, took grad online courses at Osgoode & now doing my LLM in UBC! I saved ur website to my bookmarks. Taking evidence this semester, Ill make sure to check ur videos for each topic to enhance my comprehension of the material (get a different perspective and explanation)! Thanks for doing this !!! Good luck with your teaching profession
this was very helpful thank youu!
Presumption of innocence may be constitutional, but it is definitely not adhered too.
Thank you
Thanks for making these videos!
You are very welcome!
Hi their Peter. Thank you for this helpful video. I was wondering if you could give me some advice. Would I be correct or incorrect in saying that statues which shifts the burden expressly are not as problematic as implied because they are not confined in the regulations and that they are justified and proportionate and therefore legitimate under art 6?
Have a wonderful day
Innocent until proven guilty doesnt exist any more, hence so many plea deals.
6:44 Wrong! It need not be a doubt for which one could give reasons, it is simply a doubt which is reasonable.
Watch this 5 minute video if you want to learn the recipe to create a doubt in the jury's mind during a criminal trial: th-cam.com/video/_RhBkD-yCQE/w-d-xo.html
Tell that to the KKK POLICE !!🤣🤣🤣🎥🎥🎥🎥🎥☠☠☠☠🤔🤔🤔🤔
YOU DON'T WANT TO SAY POLICE COMMITTE PERJURY AND TAMPER WITH POLICE REPORTS DO YOU ???🤣🤣🤣🎥👎🎥🎥🐷🐷🐷🐖🐖🐖☠☠☠☠🤔🤔🤔🤔