[Mr. Mojo]

That’s what happens when you make the (very common) mistake of thinking “beyond a reasonable doubt” means “beyond ALL doubt.”

[Dr. Scarpetta]

That’s what happens when you make the (very common) mistake of thinking “beyond a reasonable doubt” means “beyond ALL doubt.”

Good comment. I'm going to have to quote you on that.

[demshateGod]

Yep. Is it reasonable to think a dead little girl, hidden in swamp, killed herself? Or that the mother, who lied to investigators repeatedly, had nothing to do with it? No, it is not reasonable. Maybe some in the jury saw it as a game between the prosecution and the defense. And the defense had more points at the end of the game. Maybe the rest saw it as a reality tv show.

This is the America we live in now. The epistemology is Dancing with the Stars for some and NFL for the others.

[DejaJude]

That’s what happens when you make the (very common) mistake of thinking “beyond a reasonable doubt” means “beyond ALL doubt.”

My husband said, "well, they didn't prove she did it beyond a shadow of a doubt." I couldn't believe he said it.

[MizSterious]

Indeed. There was a thoughtful column posted within a thread on that very subject: how the closing remarks by the defense made it seem that if there was ANY doubt, reasonable or not, they should vote “not guilty.” Jurors need to be educated about the difference between “reasonable doubt” and “any shadow of a doubt.”

[Outlaw Woman]

That’s what happens when you make the (very common) mistake of thinking “beyond a reasonable doubt” means “beyond ALL doubt.”

Absolutely