Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
While 10% thought ‘probable’ was enough to convict, 76% believed they must be ‘absolutely certain’. Even more concerning, 51% said ‘any doubt at all’ required acquittal.
The ‘domestic analogy’—comparing guilt to important life decisions—proved ‘confusing’ and risked diluting the standard. With only 5% correctly identifying both the level of probability and the nature of doubt, the authors conclude that ‘sure’ alone is ‘simply too vague’.
RELATED ARTICLES
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=28793f10_1)
