{"title":"The beyond a reasonable doubt standard of proof: Juror understanding and reform","authors":"Olivia K. H. Smith","doi":"10.1177/13657127221114498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The beyond a reasonable doubt (BARD) standard of proof is the foundation of criminal court proceedings in the U.S. However, both empirical and field studies alike demonstrate that jurors do not correctly interpret and apply the standard. Misinterpretations of the standard can have large implications for criminal defendants on trial. Thus, researchers and legal scholars have attempted to clarify the standard through various methods (e.g. quantification, reasoning, linguistic simplification, and procedural changes), and some of these methods have promising features. The purpose of the current review is to provide a comprehensive overview of these proposals and determine future directions for researchers and legal practitioners.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"26 1","pages":"291 - 308"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127221114498","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The beyond a reasonable doubt (BARD) standard of proof is the foundation of criminal court proceedings in the U.S. However, both empirical and field studies alike demonstrate that jurors do not correctly interpret and apply the standard. Misinterpretations of the standard can have large implications for criminal defendants on trial. Thus, researchers and legal scholars have attempted to clarify the standard through various methods (e.g. quantification, reasoning, linguistic simplification, and procedural changes), and some of these methods have promising features. The purpose of the current review is to provide a comprehensive overview of these proposals and determine future directions for researchers and legal practitioners.