Theories and Burdens of Proof

Question 1

Who has the evidentiary burden?

Answer 1

Whoever is bringing the claim -> if there is a defence to a criminal offence

The question is whether there is SUFFICIENT evidence to move forward

Question 2

In a criminal trial where is the evidence assessed for its sufficiency?

Answer 2

Preliminary inquiry

The purpose of a trial is to CHALLENGE the sufficiency of the Crowns evidence

Question 3

The only conclusion you need for me to exist is whether in such a case the evidence is true

Answer 3

Direct evidence

Question 4

The only question that exists for me is whether guilt is a reasonable inference, what am I?

Answer 4

Circumstantial evidence

R v Arcuri

Question 5

“Is there some evidence on all the essential elements of the offence so that a jury properly instructed and acting reasonably could convict?” What legal test am I?

Answer 5

I am the legal test of sufficiency

Question 6

There must be a weighing of evidence if this kind of evidence exists

Answer 6

Circumstantial evidence

Question is “If the crown’s evidence is believed, it would be reasonable for a properly instructed jury to infer guilt”

Question 7

For a defence to be presented to a jury, that defence must possess ____

Answer 7

An air of reality

Question 8

Who has the persuasive burden?

Answer 8

Plaintiff (Civil case) Applicant (Charter case), Crown (Criminal Case), Defence is special cases (NCR, Intoxication, automatism)

Question 9

What is the standard of proof in civil cases?

Answer 9

Balance of probabilities

Question 10

What is the standard of proof in criminal cases that apply only to the Crown

Answer 10

Proof Beyond a Reasonable DOubt

Question 11

R v Lifchus clarified that there is a special meaning for Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt which was what?

Answer 11

Higher than probable guilt

Question 12

What case clarifies that probable guilt is closer to absolute certainty, that it is not mandatory to instruct this but SHOULD

Answer 12

R v Starr