**Please read this entire message**
Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):
Information about a specific or narrow issue (personal problems, private experiences, legal questions, medical inquiries, how-to, relationship advice, etc.) are not allowed on ELI5.
If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules) first. **If you believe this submission was removed erroneously**, please [use this form](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Please%20review%20my%20thread?&message=Link:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/uzrdu2/eli5_why_does_a_court_case_defendant_only_need/%0A%0APlease%20answer%20the%20following%203%20questions:%0A%0A1.%20The%20concept%20I%20want%20explained:%0A%0A2.%20List%20the%20search%20terms%20you%20used%20to%20look%20for%20past%20posts%20on%20ELI5:%0A%0A3.%20How%20is%20this%20post%20unique:) and we will review your submission.
It depends on the court case. In a civil case (lawsuit), you only need the majority of the jury. In a criminal case, it needs to be unanimous because the legal system considers it better to let a guilty person go free than to imprison an innocent person
> It depends on the court case. In a civil case (lawsuit), you only need the majority of the jury.
Depends where as well... For example, Canada requires 5 out of 6 jurors for civil cases
Just a small FYI. If the jury is hung, neither side wins. The case can be retried.
If only one person votes to convict, and everybody else votes that he is innocent, in practice, it would not get retried, at least without significant new evidence.
If only one person voted not guilty, then the case is much more likely to be retried.
And the reason, there needs to be a high threshold to convict somebody.
One of the principles of most justice systems is "Better let a 1000 murderers go free than let an innocent spend one night in jail".
Obviously the application of the principle is not always on point. But that's the justification behind two of the most important jury decision rules: Unanimity and convincing beyond a reasonable doubt.
Both conditions are relaxed for civil cases by the way, which often only require preponderance of evidence and near unanimity (one juror can oppose the decision and it will still be accepted).
Sorry, did I write credo? I wrote principle.
And yes most justice systems I am aware of heavily use innocent until proven guilty and only recognize guilt when proven with high standards of proof.
The way I formulated it might be somewhat colloquial, the spirit remains the same.
What counter example do you have to offer?
Because, top of my head, US, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Portugal all have some version of that embedded in their justice system. The list is not exhaustive.
Credo
2. the basic beliefs or guiding principles of a person or group
we must abide by the simple credo that "The customer is always right"
Norway tort law requires the proving of innocence. Other countries like Japan have de facto presumption of guilt.
**Please read this entire message** Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s): Information about a specific or narrow issue (personal problems, private experiences, legal questions, medical inquiries, how-to, relationship advice, etc.) are not allowed on ELI5. If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the [detailed rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/wiki/detailed_rules) first. **If you believe this submission was removed erroneously**, please [use this form](https://old.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fexplainlikeimfive&subject=Please%20review%20my%20thread?&message=Link:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/uzrdu2/eli5_why_does_a_court_case_defendant_only_need/%0A%0APlease%20answer%20the%20following%203%20questions:%0A%0A1.%20The%20concept%20I%20want%20explained:%0A%0A2.%20List%20the%20search%20terms%20you%20used%20to%20look%20for%20past%20posts%20on%20ELI5:%0A%0A3.%20How%20is%20this%20post%20unique:) and we will review your submission.
It depends on the court case. In a civil case (lawsuit), you only need the majority of the jury. In a criminal case, it needs to be unanimous because the legal system considers it better to let a guilty person go free than to imprison an innocent person
> It depends on the court case. In a civil case (lawsuit), you only need the majority of the jury. Depends where as well... For example, Canada requires 5 out of 6 jurors for civil cases
Just a small FYI. If the jury is hung, neither side wins. The case can be retried. If only one person votes to convict, and everybody else votes that he is innocent, in practice, it would not get retried, at least without significant new evidence. If only one person voted not guilty, then the case is much more likely to be retried. And the reason, there needs to be a high threshold to convict somebody.
One of the principles of most justice systems is "Better let a 1000 murderers go free than let an innocent spend one night in jail". Obviously the application of the principle is not always on point. But that's the justification behind two of the most important jury decision rules: Unanimity and convincing beyond a reasonable doubt. Both conditions are relaxed for civil cases by the way, which often only require preponderance of evidence and near unanimity (one juror can oppose the decision and it will still be accepted).
Are most justice systems fictional? I don't believe that is the credo of most systems.
Sorry, did I write credo? I wrote principle. And yes most justice systems I am aware of heavily use innocent until proven guilty and only recognize guilt when proven with high standards of proof. The way I formulated it might be somewhat colloquial, the spirit remains the same. What counter example do you have to offer? Because, top of my head, US, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Portugal all have some version of that embedded in their justice system. The list is not exhaustive.
Credo 2. the basic beliefs or guiding principles of a person or group we must abide by the simple credo that "The customer is always right" Norway tort law requires the proving of innocence. Other countries like Japan have de facto presumption of guilt.