top of page

UNDERSTANDING "BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT" IN QUEENSLAND'S CRIMINAL TRIALS


Understanding Beyond Reasonable Doubt - Criminal Law Queensland

"Beyond reasonable doubt" stands as the universally recognised ‘gold standard’ of proof in criminal cases. But what exactly does beyond reasonable doubt mean? How do we determine how much doubt is reasonable, and why is this concept so crucial?


The Presumption of Innocence


A fundamental element of the Queensland legal system is the presumption of innocence.

In the eyes of the law, a person is presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

In essence, the presumption of innocence pertains two essential aspects:

  • You are considered legally innocent until proven guilty; and

  • To establish guilt, the evidence must be highly compelling.

Legislation and the Standard of Proof


In civil disputes between businesses, the standard of proof is notably lower. In civil disputes, the standard "on the balance of probabilities" is present, where a claim must be more likely true than not.


In criminal matters, however, the aforementioned presumption of innocence requires a significantly higher threshold.


The standard of proof is outline in section 141 of the Evidence Act, which mandates:


(1) In a criminal proceeding, the court is not to find the case of the prosecution proved unless it is satisfied that it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

(2) In a criminal proceeding, the court is to find the case of a defendant proved if it is satisfied that the case has been proved on the balance of probabilities.


This legislation emphasises the significant contrast between the standards of proof in criminal and civil matters, underlining the paramount importance of the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard in criminal trials.


The Bar of "Beyond Reasonable Doubt"


"Beyond reasonable doubt" means that the prosecution must prove the defendant's guilt to such a high degree of certainty that there is no reasonable doubt left in the minds of the jurors (or judge, in some cases) as to the defendant's guilt.


The Jury's Role


Determining whether the "beyond reasonable doubt" test has been met falls to those responsible for establishing facts. In many cases, this is the jury. However, in certain situations, the judge assumes this role.


If there remains a reasonable doubt regarding the defendant's guilt, their duty is to acquit them - meaning they must find the defendant not guilty.


Alternatively, if the jury finds themselves free of such doubt, their responsibility is to convict, indicating that they should find the defendant guilty.


Challenging a Verdict


What if you firmly believe an incorrect verdict was reached - concluding guilt when there was ample doubt?

While some grounds of appeal exist, it is a complex process that necessitates legal guidance.

Seeking Legal Guidance


If you face criminal charges, gaining a clear understanding of the evidence against you and its likelihood to meet the "beyond reasonable doubt" test is essential. To navigate this complex terrain, it is important to seek advice from a professional criminal lawyer.


Contact Creevey Horrell Criminal Lawyers


Based in Brisbane, Roma, Toowoomba, and Townsville.

Visit www.chcriminallawyers.com.au/contact-us to contact us today.


Comments


bottom of page