Let's assume that it was proven, that for both John and James it was criminal negligence. They had the same guns and bullet was not found and they cannot determine exactly who's bullet actually killed the Bill. John and James shot from the gun at the same time and Billed was killed accidentally, unintentionally. On shooting range was 3 persons, John, Bill and James. Maybe it is stupid example, because I do not expert in all these things, but still. If 80% is not enough to establish guilt, what should the number be? Is it 90%, 95% or 99%? What is the correct verdict in this case? Let's say expert is very professional, experienced and nobody has doubt about his competence and etc. Or maybe this report is a summary based on many evidence, but anyway, final result of expert conclusion "probability that Bill was killed by John is 80%." They go to court and there is only 1 evidence some kind of expert report, which tells that probability that Bill was killed by John is 80%. We all know that a person should be convicted of a crime if there is no reasonable doubt that the person is guilty.īill was killed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |