|
|
Beyond any Doubt of Guilt or Guilty beyond any doubt Guilty beyond reasonable doubt explains the age long level of proof established over 250 years ago when gathering evidence was that: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer". Historically, the message that government and the courts must err on the side of innocence has remained constant. Although Authoritarian personalities might take the opposite view. William Blackstone is believed to have stated that "it is better that ten guilty persons escape, than one innocent person suffer".
250 years later, scope now often exists to Sentence an accused based on Guilty beyond any doubt, as opposed to Guilty beyond reasonable doubt, due to - (a) Forensic Evidence; and/or (b) CCTV And Photo Evidence; and or (c) multiple witness testimonies,
Hence, the argument against Capital Punishment for fear of executing an innocent man no longer prevails as a higher level of proof, namely Guilt beyond any doubt is now often attainable. Below is an extract from journalist, David Sergeant article It’s time to bring back the death penalty in the Australia Spectator - 15 Jan 2019: "Rigorous precautions can ensure incorrect execution is all but impossible, with the death penalty available only in cases in which evidence is diverse and overwhelming. The accused must be convicted by a unanimous jury of their peers and their conviction open to repeated appeal.
Below is an extract from Argument 5. "Irrevocable Mistakes" in Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments - Capital Punishment: |
|
|
|