9
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 7:
Line 7: − − In all [[United States]] Federal and State courts, the burden of proof starts on the party making an assertion (the "moving party"). Once a specific standard has been met (which varies on numerous conditions), the burden shifts to the "non-moving party." In criminal cases in the United States, the government must prove that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, while the defendant need do nothing. In civil cases, the party making an assertion must prove that assertion is more likely true than not. Still, if the moving party fails to meet that burden, the assertion is deemed false. The United States courts unequivocally find that the defending party need not do anything until the moving party meets its burden of proof. Note that in a number of other countries, criminal defendants bear the burden of proving that they are not guilty. −
Removed section about the United States' criminal justice system, as it was irrelevant.
This principle on which the philosophy is founded comes from the Latin phrases like ''necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit'' meaning "the necessity of proof lies with he who complains" and ''ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non que negat,'' meaning "the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies."
This principle on which the philosophy is founded comes from the Latin phrases like ''necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit'' meaning "the necessity of proof lies with he who complains" and ''ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non que negat,'' meaning "the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies."
== Theistic responses ==
== Theistic responses ==
{{rewrite|it is confusing or unclear}}
{{rewrite|it is confusing or unclear}}