HEY AJ!

Kharn · **Posted:** Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:49 am

Thoughts?

Does he miss anything? What movies inspired you? Any specific scene from said movies you'd love to redo?

Bourne · **Posted:** Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:22 pm

Pretty cool! Since I use to be a law student I find this interesting. Some of the stuff he says is really true but law in my country differs from the USA but can be more or less accurate.

Nice Video.

AJtheGreyBeard025 · **Posted:** Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:55 pm

This is a pretty great video that really contrasts what hollywood depicts the legal system to be and how it is in actuality. As you can tell the legal system is pretty mechanical and procedure heavy, it developed this way due to how law evolved here in the US versus the common law system that the UK uses.

The one thing that bugs me is when he explains the difference in the civil and criminal cases burden of proof. In civil, the standard to win a case is "preponderance of the evidence" which means more than likely, or better yet 51% sure its that way. In criminal law, the standard to convict is "beyond a reasonable doubt." This is the highest legal standard in the court system as criminal law deals with personal liberty while civil system handles $$$$$$$.

What he explains incorrectly is trying to define "beyond a reasonable doubt" with a percentage. In fact there is no clear cut definition of what "beyond a reasonable doubt". You take it by the definition of the words that make up that standard. It basically asks that if you had to judge someone, you ask yourself with the evidence presented and the elements of the crime given to me, do I (a) have a doubt, (b) is it reasonable, and (c) does it go to an element that the State has to prove.

Basically a common sense standard, does the evidence positively show that each element of the crime??

I loved watching legal shows growing up like Boston Legal, the Practice, and Law & Order and its spin offs. As far as movies, the movie that got me interested in being a trial lawyer is Rules of Engagement and then of course LOVED the underrated movie "The Judge with Robert Downey Jr. and Robert Duval.

Tricky · **Posted:** Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:34 pm

AJtheGreyBeard025 wrote:

This is a pretty great video that really contrasts what hollywood depicts the legal system to be and how it is in actuality. As you can tell the legal system is pretty mechanical and procedure heavy, it developed this way due to how law evolved here in the US versus the common law system that the UK uses.

The one thing that bugs me is when he explains the difference in the civil and criminal cases burden of proof. In civil, the standard to win a case is "preponderance of the evidence" which means more than likely, or better yet 51% sure its that way. In criminal law, the standard to convict is "beyond a reasonable doubt." This is the highest legal standard in the court system as criminal law deals with personal liberty while civil system handles $$$$$$$.

What he explains incorrectly is trying to define "beyond a reasonable doubt" with a percentage. In fact there is no clear cut definition of what "beyond a reasonable doubt". You take it by the definition of the words that make up that standard. It basically asks that if you had to judge someone, you ask yourself with the evidence presented and the elements of the crime given to me, do I (a) have a doubt, (b) is it reasonable, and (c) does it go to an element that the State has to prove.

Basically a common sense standard, does the evidence positively show that each element of the crime??

I loved watching legal shows growing up like Boston Legal, the Practice, and Law & Order and its spin offs. As far as movies, the movie that got me interested in being a trial lawyer is Rules of Engagement and then of course LOVED the underrated movie "The Judge with Robert Downey Jr. and Robert Duval.

If it ain't criminal minds don't

AJtheGreyBeard025 · **Posted:** Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:40 pm

#get educated.

BriBee · **Posted:** Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:46 pm

Tricky wrote:

AJtheGreyBeard025 wrote:

This is a pretty great video that really contrasts what hollywood depicts the legal system to be and how it is in actuality. As you can tell the legal system is pretty mechanical and procedure heavy, it developed this way due to how law evolved here in the US versus the common law system that the UK uses.

The one thing that bugs me is when he explains the difference in the civil and criminal cases burden of proof. In civil, the standard to win a case is "preponderance of the evidence" which means more than likely, or better yet 51% sure its that way. In criminal law, the standard to convict is "beyond a reasonable doubt." This is the highest legal standard in the court system as criminal law deals with personal liberty while civil system handles $$$$$$$.

What he explains incorrectly is trying to define "beyond a reasonable doubt" with a percentage. In fact there is no clear cut definition of what "beyond a reasonable doubt". You take it by the definition of the words that make up that standard. It basically asks that if you had to judge someone, you ask yourself with the evidence presented and the elements of the crime given to me, do I (a) have a doubt, (b) is it reasonable, and (c) does it go to an element that the State has to prove.

Basically a common sense standard, does the evidence positively show that each element of the crime??

I loved watching legal shows growing up like Boston Legal, the Practice, and Law & Order and its spin offs. As far as movies, the movie that got me interested in being a trial lawyer is Rules of Engagement and then of course LOVED the underrated movie "The Judge with Robert Downey Jr. and Robert Duval.

If it ain't criminal minds don't

Central · **Posted:** Thu Aug 09, 2018 4:32 am

BriBee wrote:

Tricky wrote:

AJtheGreyBeard025 wrote:

This is a pretty great video that really contrasts what hollywood depicts the legal system to be and how it is in actuality. As you can tell the legal system is pretty mechanical and procedure heavy, it developed this way due to how law evolved here in the US versus the common law system that the UK uses.

The one thing that bugs me is when he explains the difference in the civil and criminal cases burden of proof. In civil, the standard to win a case is "preponderance of the evidence" which means more than likely, or better yet 51% sure its that way. In criminal law, the standard to convict is "beyond a reasonable doubt." This is the highest legal standard in the court system as criminal law deals with personal liberty while civil system handles $$$$$$$.

What he explains incorrectly is trying to define "beyond a reasonable doubt" with a percentage. In fact there is no clear cut definition of what "beyond a reasonable doubt". You take it by the definition of the words that make up that standard. It basically asks that if you had to judge someone, you ask yourself with the evidence presented and the elements of the crime given to me, do I (a) have a doubt, (b) is it reasonable, and (c) does it go to an element that the State has to prove.

Basically a common sense standard, does the evidence positively show that each element of the crime??

I loved watching legal shows growing up like Boston Legal, the Practice, and Law & Order and its spin offs. As far as movies, the movie that got me interested in being a trial lawyer is Rules of Engagement and then of course LOVED the underrated movie "The Judge with Robert Downey Jr. and Robert Duval.

If it ain't criminal minds don't

Register

Login

HEY AJ!

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Who is online