• Reducing Wrongful Convictions in Texas September 7, 2010
    More people have been freed through DNA testing in Texas than in any other state in the country, and these exonerations have revealed deep flaws in the state's criminal justice system. Thirty-five of the 41 DNA exonerations in Texas involved eyewitness misidentifications.In an op-ed Saturday in the Houston Chronicle, Texas Senator Rodney Ellis and Innoc […]
  • The Importance of a "No Contest" Plea in a California DUI Case September 8, 2010
    Because a “no contest” plea is essentially the same as a guilty plea…given that both result in a sentence…you may not give much thought to which plea to enter if you are about to be convicted of misdemeanor driving under...Because a “no contest” plea is essentially the same as a guilty plea…given that both result in a sentence…you may not give much thought t […]
  • Ha-Redeye and Yap — Piedra v. Copper Mesa Mining Corporation September 7, 2010
    In the spirit of increased collegiality and collaboration within the Canadian legal blogging community, LawisCool.com and TheCourt.ca have set aside their heated rivalry to bring you their first ever joint posting. What follows is a commentary on the interesting case of Piedra v. Copper Mesa Mining Corporation, 2010 ONSC 2421. Commentator for LawisCool.com: […]
(c) Copyright
All postings on this site are the sole property of Aswani K. Datt and are not to be reproduced in any manner without the prior written consent of Aswani K. Datt. The postings on this site is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for legal advice nor does any posting constitute a solicitor client relationship.

The Presumption of Innocence

The presumption of innocence — being innocent until proven guilty — is a legal right that the accused has in Canada. It states that no person shall be considered guilty until finally convicted by a court. The burden of proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, is thus on the prosecution, which has to collect and present enough proving evidence to convince the judge and jury, who are restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissable, and in most cases lawfully obtained, that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In case of remaining doubts, the accused is to be found not guilty ; this idea expressed by the Latin legal maxim “In dubio pro reo“.

This duty on the prosecution was famously referred to as the ‘golden thread’ in the criminal law by Lord Sankey LC in Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462:

Throughout the web of the English criminal law one golden thread is always to be seen – that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner’s guilt subject to what I have already said as to the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exception…

In principle, the defense does not have to ‘prove’ anything. The defense may present evidence tending to show that there is a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused.

In Canada, section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states: “Any person charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal”.

In criminal law, Blackstone’s formulation (also known as Blackstone’s ratio or the Blackstone ratio) is the principle: “better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer“, expressed by the English jurist William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, published in the 1760s.

Comments are closed.