New answers tagged

0

Here's another large aspect of the problem: define "conclusive" in this hypothetical situation. Trials, at least at US criminal law, are by jury by right of the accused. That means all these criminal elements of fact such as "reasonableness" etc. are determined by peers, not judges. There is no such thing as "conclusive" fact in ...


7

There's a saying hard cases make bad law: Hard cases make bad law is an adage or legal maxim. The phrase means that an extreme case is a poor basis for a general law that would cover a wider range of less extreme cases. In other words, a general law is better drafted for the average circumstance as this will be more common. Maybe you can find a case where ...


8

As far as the US is concerned, the provision of the US constitution ends the discussion, unless there is some latent and unresolved unclarity what the 5th Amendment says. Bear in mind that the amendment refers to "jeopardy" and not just "punishment" or "conviction" – even the possibility of conviction. To overcome the US ...


13

Why do other countries, like America, not allow this? It is the way that U.S. courts have interpreted the constitutional amendment requirement and reflects a policy judgment that letting someone go free now and then is better than frequently forcing someone to be tried more than once. That value judgment flowed from concerns about and fear and skepticism of ...


3

The rules is evidence are virtually identical in civil and criminal cases. Like most state rules, the Federal Rules of Evidence begin with a rule (Rule 101) saying that they apply in criminal and civil cases alike. There are some differences, mostly where the courts or legislatures have concluded that certain types of evidence should be treated a certain way,...


4

Focusing on the part of the question where you say But my question relates to "evidence." That is, does "admissible evidence" have to be of the same or different standard in a civil versus criminal case there can be (are) some differences in admissibility between civil and criminal cases. Looking at the Federal Rules of Evidence, FRE ...


2

Generally... There are important caveats to the general "two-party" consent rule in the State of California; I will attempt to generally describe some of them. "To violate the PC section 632 rule the communication must be "confidential" - this means that recordings taken in places where the other party should have reasonably ...


3

england-and-wales There is nothing in the criminal law to compel Party X to identify Party Y in this scenario - they are under no legal obligation to contact the police or anyone else, and a witness summons, for example, cannot be served as there is no trial. That said, one option is for the victim to make a complaint to the police for an alleged offence of ...


Top 50 recent answers are included