Criminal Case and Criminal

¶ … Criminal and Civil Law A man is charged with brutally killing his ex-wife and her friend, and the family of the two victims also file civil lawsuits "against the man for the damages suffered by the families" (Walston-Dunham, 99) because of the deaths. The first case is a criminal case because the state prosecutor files a case against the man. However, the second proceeding is a civil case because the families of the victims file lawsuits to claim the damages.

In the first case, the man was not charged with the criminal offense because there was no proof beyond a reasonable doubt to find the man guilty. However, the man was found guilty in the civil proceeding based on the preponderance of the evidence. The objective of this study to determine the reason the same evidence are not used for both the criminal and civil proceedings.

"Reason Same Standard of Evidence not used in both Criminal and Civil Case" (Walston-Dunham, 99) The same type of evidence cannot be used for both the criminal cases and civil cases because the standard of proof for the criminal case is based on "beyond a reasonable doubt" (Walston-Dunham, 99). While the standard of proof for the civil proceeding is based on "balance of probability" (Walston-Dunham, 99).

Thus, it is widely understood that the standard of evidence that a judge will accept to convict a suspect is higher in the criminal case than a civil proceeding. In the case of the man charged with a brutal murder, it is essential to understand that the man is being charged with both the criminal and civil cases at the same time. However, evidentiary rules in criminal and civil cases lie on the standard of proof required to persuade the court.

Typically, the appropriate proof required to persuade a court in a criminal case should substantially heavier than in a civil case. Thus, the prosecutor should proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal proceeding before the man can be charged with murder, however, the standard of proof to found the man guilty of murder is based on a preponderance of the evidence in a civil proceeding. Moreover, the law defines the burden of proof to convict a suspect for criminal charges and civil cases.

In the criminal proceedings, the prosecutor must prove all elements of the criminal offenses as being laid down by the Criminal code. Since everyone charged with a criminal offense is presumed innocent until the person is proved guilty based on the law protocol, however, it is not necessary to proof a case beyond a reasonable doubt in a civil case to charge the man. Dabesu, and Eshetu argue the standard of proof is the major evidential rule between the criminal and civil cases. (2).

A standard of proof is defined as the level of proofs required to persuade a court. A standard of proof in a criminal proceeding is heavier showing that the public processor should proof beyond reasonable doubt that the man is guilty of the offense. In another word, the law demands that the judges should be absolutely certain the man is guilty. Some commentators argue that the level of proof to apprehend a suspect in a criminal case is high, which may allow guilty people escaping criminal punishments.

However, it is essential to realize that the criminal proceeding is a matter of life and death. In a criminal case, a man can be sentenced to 30- day imprisonment or life imprisonment. In some country, a man found guilty of a criminal offense can be sentenced to death.

Since a court does not want to convict a man found innocent afterward, thus, the court has to weigh the evidence presented by the public prosecutor, and be convinced that the evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt before the court can found the man guilty of the offense. However, the case is different in a civil case. There is no imprisonment in a civil proceeding and punishment is generally based on monetary fine.

Thus, the level of punishment in the civil case allows the court to accept fair evidence to found the man guilty. 2) 5.4a. The motion to inspect is an appropriate motion for the issue of the plane crash. The motion to inspect is a motion requested by a defendant from the court to determine whether the evidence can be legally sufficient to move a charge.

In the case of the plane crash, the motion to inspect can be used to inspect the cause of the accident to determine whether the plane is caused by the error from the plane manufacturer in order to proceed a civil litigation.

"The request for inspection of the specific items set out above is essential to ensure Defendant his right to a fair hearing, his right to confrontation, his right to prepare a defense on his own behalf, his right to the effective assistance of counsel and due process of law guaranteed by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article I, § 10, 13 and 19 of the Texas Constitution and article 39.14 of the Texas Code of Criminal procedure". (County Texas, 1). 5.4 c.

Motion to dismiss is the appropriate motion for this case that Crystal filed against her former employer because there is no evidence that her employer actually makes sexual advances towards her. Typically, motion to dismiss is pursuant to subdivision section 210.20 under the Federal code. 5.4 d. Motion to dismiss is the appropriate motion for the case because the partner has voluntarily withdrawn from the partnership when the business has suffered a loss. However, Stephen shouldered all the risks alone to make the business profitable.

In the agreement, two of them should participate in the business venture, however, when the former partner has voluntarily withdrawn from the business, he is not entitled to the profits earned in the business because he does.