One of the most important principles in the NSW criminal justice system is the requirement that the prosecution prove a case beyond reasonable doubt. It is the highest legal standard of proof and plays a critical role in protecting individuals from wrongful conviction.
If you have watched a criminal trial or heard legal commentary in the media, you have likely heard the phrase before. However, many people misunderstand what it actually means and how difficult it is for the prosecution to satisfy this standard.
The prosecution bears the burden of proof
In every criminal case in NSW, a person is presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The crown must persuade a jury that the person is guilty, beyond reasonable doubt. This means the burden of proof rests entirely on the prosecution to establish every essential fact needed to constitute the offence charged. It is not enough for the prosecution to show that the offence may have been committed, or even that it is more probable than not that it occurred.
The accused person does not need to prove their innocence. An accused may give evidence, but it does not shift the burden of proof. If there is a reasonable doubt, the accused must be found not guilty.
The question that has to be asked at the close of the evidence and after the submissions will be:
- Is there any reasonable possibility that the accused is not guilty?
What is the onus of proof if the accused gives a version
The accused has a right to silence and does not need to prove anything; however, where the accused calls evidence or gives an exculpatory account in a record of interview, the question must be asked:
- That if the version offered by the accused or by witnesses called on the accused’s behalf is accepted, the Court must bring in a verdict of not guilty.
- That if it is reasonably possible that the version offered by the accused or by witnesses called on the accused’s behalf is true, the prosecution has failed to prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt
Liberato and Murray directions are judicial instructions given to juries in Australian criminal trials to ensure they properly understand and apply the burden of proof.
A liberato direction applies when the prosecution and defence witnesses’ evidence directly conflict. Even if the jury prefers the witness’s evidence, they must not convict unless satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Murray direction applies where the prosecution’s case depends heavily on a single essential witness. The jury must carefully assess that witness’s honesty and reliability. Additionally, they may need to exercise caution before convicting if the evidence is uncorroborated.
But what does beyond reasonable doubt actually mean
The criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof known to the law.
There is a longstanding authority for the proposition that, except in certain limited circumstances, no attempt should be made to explain or embellish the meaning of the phrase “beyond reasonable doubt”. The jury should not base reasonable doubt on possibilities that are unrealistic or highly unlikely. The judge can tell them to ignore such possibilities when deciding the case. In practical terms, if a judge or jury is left uncertain about whether the accused committed the offence, the law requires an acquittal. The question of whether there is a reasonable doubt is subjective, meaning it is to be determined by each individual juror.
Why is the standard so high?
Criminal law imposes the highest standard of proof because the consequences of conviction are so serious. NSW courts recognise that it is better. For a guilty person to go free than for an innocent person to be wrongfully convicted.
Will beyond reasonsable doubt be applied to my case?
The requirement to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt applies to every criminal offence in NSW, as well as most traffic offences. The court must carefully assess whether the evidence is reliable, lawful, and persuasive enough to meet the required standard. If there are inconsistencies, credibility issues, gaps in the evidence, or alternative explanations, reasonable doubt may arise.
Even where allegations appear strong, weaknesses in the evidence may significantly affect whether the prosecution can prove its case.
We can help you
At Australian Criminal Law Group, we offer a free first consultation. This is an excellent opportunity to meet one of our experienced and proven criminal lawyers face-to-face, share the details about the case, and ask any questions you or they might have. All first consultations are obligation-free and conducted in the strictest confidence. You can read more about our first free consultation here.
Our team of criminal lawyers has 500+ 5-star reviews on Google and 60 years of combined experience, with each lawyer having 5 to 20 years of criminal law experience.
You can read our reviews here.