Sentences with phrase «guilt of a defendant»

In particular, Caproni criticized Bharara's characterization of Albany — «politicians are supposed to be on the people's payroll, not on secret retainer to wealthy special interests they do favors for» — saying that it could be considered «a commentary on the character or guilt of the defendant.»

The legal analogy is judging the guilt of the defendant based on what you have read in the newspaper and your own background knowledge, without actually going through the process of weighing and debating the evidence.

Dr. Curry, In your response of 11:51 am, you said: «The legal analogy is judging the guilt of the defendant based on what you have read in the newspaper and your own background knowledge, without actually going through the process of weighing and debating the evidence.»

In personal injury lawsuits, the case is pursued as a civil action and does not intend to prove the guilt of a defendant or whether or not a crime was committed.

Provides that where a person is charged in respect of conduct that is an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (SOA 2003) and was an offence under one of the repealed offences listed in sub-s (2), and the only thing preventing the person being found guilty is that it can not be proven beyond reasonable doubt whether the conduct took place before or after the commencement of SOA 2003, then it shall be conclusively presumed for the purposes of determining the guilt of the defendant that the conduct took place at a time when the offence in respect of that conduct carried the lower penalty in terms of a custodial sentence which could be imposed on conviction of the defendant.

The initial recent court proceeding, of which I was a material witness / party, has resulted thus far in the judge, after a full day of in court proceedings, seemingly accepting the guilt of the defendant by way of suggesting the parties again privately engage in negotiating how much the defendant should pay the plaintiff over and above a previous (pre trial) defendant - offered amount to settle out of court.

Not exact matches

«This court, as a trier of fact, is simply not firmly convinced of defendant's guilt,» Judge Wilson wrote in his ruling.

Federal law splits capital death penalty cases into two separate phases: the first determining the guilt or innocence of the defendant, the second - if found guilty - determining their sentence.

«Since the transfer of the money from the Mayor to the Independence Party was the larceny, the evidence also proved defendants» guilt of money laundering, based on the transfer of the proceeds of the larceny from the Independence Party to the shell corporation.»

«These were statements where the U.S. Attorney excoriated the defendant, basically deprived him of the presumption of innocence and extolled his guilt,» lawyer Steven Molo said in court before U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni.

When assistant district attorney Kevin (Stephen Rannazzisi) meets with defense attorney Ruxin (Nick Kroll) about one of Ruxin's clients, they launch plea - bargaining negotiations in which the central chip turns out not to be the defendant's guilt, but a first - round draft pick in the fantasy league.

So there is a presumption of guilt unless the defendant can prove otherwise, this is known as the «reverse burden of proof» and is detailed in Section 40 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

In a series of emotional exchanges with defense attorneys, Baxter seemed disgusted that more of the defendants hadn't chosen to admit guilt in exchange for leniency.

The film is a fictional story of a jury of 12 men as they deliberate the guilt or acquittal of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt.

In the 18th century, magistrates were expected to assess the probability of a defendant's guilt by calculating the sum of the testimony against him.

Well, there's a couple things to note @Dmitry: First off, you're innocent until proven guilty, so if something like this happens, the onus is on the Crown to prove guilt on the part of the defendant.

In the Dorf post, Colb expands on her column, reflecting on the difference between a rule where an officer's motivations are irrelevant to one where his beliefs are irrelevant, and why the concepts of intent and motive are distinguishable when assessing a defendant's guilt:

The Blog of the Legal Times reports that in one recent case in the District of Columbia Superior Court, the court granted the prosecutors» request for a jury instruction that, if the jury found that the defendant had tried to change his appearance with eyeglasses to avoid being identified, the jury could consider it as evidence of his feelings of guilt.

Of course, general weight - based perceptions were controlled for, showing no change in perception of guilt when the defendant was obese and malOf course, general weight - based perceptions were controlled for, showing no change in perception of guilt when the defendant was obese and malof guilt when the defendant was obese and male.

room for doubt about a defendant's guilt in a criminal case, in a civil case, the plaintiff must prove that it is 51 percent (or more) likely that the defendant committed an act of malpractice, and that the malpractice was the cause of the plaintiff's injuries.

Essentially, while there is no room for doubt about a defendant's guilt in a criminal case, in a civil case, the plaintiff must prove that it is 51 percent (or more) likely that the defendant committed an act of malpractice, and that the malpractice was the cause of the plaintiff's injuries.

A couple of weeks ago we highlighted some particularly egregious examples of inappropriate social media use in the courtroom, such as a judge sending a Facebook «like» request to one of the parties in a case she was ruling on, jurors polling their friends on Twitter regarding the guilt or innocence of the defendant in the case they were hearing, and the like.

Police psychologically need to believe that since the defendant gets a jury trial, and the state has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, convictions of innocent people are rare.

«For a defendant to be penalized by the government — whether you call it «punishment» or «forfeiture» — for a purported criminal act, the government should, one would hope, be required to obtain a finding of criminal guilt (i.e., guilt beyond a reasonable doubt), either by guilty plea or conviction at trial.»

In his closing argument to the jury, Monroe County District Attorney E. David Christine Jr. pointed to the test results as compelling proof of the defendant's guilt, suggesting that a «crazy, suicidal girl» like Ji Yun wouldn't have had the mental capacity to set the fire on her own.

While a clear violation of such laws may establish the defendant's guilt in criminal court, they do not necessarily establish his or her liability for civil damages.

I think the real logic is quite practical: most of the time this situation arises in auto accident cases and our courts want defendants to be able to just pay a fine without an admission of guilt in a civil action.

So in this case the court's prior «knowledge» of the defendant's guilt was based upon an incorrect statement, and asserting their innocence (or rather, asserting they are not known to be innocent or guilty, as before the original sentence) would not be a patently false claim.

Now, don't get me wrong about this; I'd be happy to write until the cows came home about matters of substance relating to the guilt or innocence of the defendant and the liberty interests of a citizen vis a vis the constabulary, but the idea of having to disentangle all of the palaver, nonsense and gobbledygook in the document Mr. Duncan presented to me was not particularly appealing.

At the trial, the defendant is presumed innocent, and can not be convicted unless 12 impartial jurors have been convinced of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Indeed, to the extent there was any doubt of the defendant's guilt before, the prosecutor is now certain that he's got the right person because the defense lawyer's act of desperation confirmed it.

HELD The maximum discount of one - third is usually available in circumstances where a defendant accepts his guilt at the earliest opportunity.

If the prosecutor in a criminal trial failed to convince the trier of fact (the judge or jury) that no reasonable doubt existed as to the defendant's guilt, a plaintiff may nevertheless be able to show that it was more likely than not (the definition of a preponderance of the evidence) that the defendant committed the child abuse alleged in a civil trial.

The Alexandria U.S. District Court affirms the magistrate judge's decision and upholds defendant's DUI conviction because there was sufficient evidence to support a finding of guilt, including an officer's observation of defendant's multiple lane violations, defendant's smell of alcohol and...

Lawyers frequently advise defendants against apologizing, because apologies can be interpreted as admissions of guilt, which could be leveraged into defendants paying more money in settlement and / or at trial.

For an individual who has a simple civil complaint it's possible that he or she will never see the inside of a court room while often criminal cases will always require at least some time spent in a court room with a representative from a Toronto criminal law firm who will assist in making declarations of guilt or innocence with the defendant.

It is likened to a free man without any traces of guilt or criminal charge imposed on the defendant.

Usually, a criminal defense lawyer works to either exploit prosecution mistakes or lack of knowledge that prevent the prosecution from proving that guilt, or work to make sure that the defendant is not convicted of a more serious crime than the one committed, and / or work to see to it that their client does not receive an unnecessarily harsh sentence when alternatives are available.

Criminal defendants are presumed innocent, so juries generally can not be commanded to presume guilt from a set of circumstances and shift to the defendant the obligation to rebut that presumption.

Sentencing Following a plea of guilt or a finding of guilt, a defendant will receive a sentence from the judge.

In a case where the primary evidence against the defendant is the identification of an eyewitness, a defendant should be permitted to present expert testimony on the reliability of eyewitness identification, whether or not there is additional corroborative evidence that could weigh in favor of guilt.

But a case worth several million would require extremely compelling facts, multiple survivors under Florida's wrongful death statute, good evidence of strong relationships between the deceased and survivors, good evidence of the defendant's guilt, and plenty of insurance coverage.

On May 14, 2018, the United States Supreme Court reversed a Louisiana defendant's capital murder conviction after his defense lawyer argued to the jury during the guilt phase of trial...

... the district court erred in dismissing a juror, based largely on its finding that the juror was purposefully disregarding the court's instructions on the law, where the record evidence raised the possibility that the juror's view on the merits of the case was motivated by doubts about the defendants» guilt, rather than by an intent to nullify the law.

A criminal lawyer investigates the case and helps identify ways to introduce doubt into the question of a defendant's guilt.

Today the Court granted certiorari to Harrington v. Richter, an ineffective assistance of counsel case challenging the issuance of habeas corpus relief by the Ninth Circuit based upon counsel's reliance on cross-examination and other methods to create reasonable doubt about the defendant's guilt rather than expert - opinion testimony.

Adjudication of guilt Deferred and Defendant placed on probation for 4 years, subject to terms and conditions of probation served on Defendant.

One common example of a jury instruction in the criminal context would be when a judge explains to the jury that the refusal of a defendant to testify does not indicate guilt.

It may also remain true that a defendant who claims he did not commit an offence (for instance of violence) but who admits his propensity to violence, may not succeed thereby in keeping out his previous convictions for violence, which may remain relevant to the question of his guilt, possibly because of the degree or nature of his propensity.

Criminal defendants are at a disadvantage if a judge's or prosecutor's missteps can be forgiven by the judge's telling the jury to disregard them, for the bell can not be unrung; the jurors can not exclude what they should not have heard from their consideration of the defendant's guilt.