The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) makes it illegal for US citizens to bribe high ranking foreign officials to get new business. A violation can have a criminal penalty that involves up to five years in prison. If Phil were to be found to be in violation of the FCPA, what standard of proof would be needed for a criminal conviction? a. Preponderance of the evidence. b. Clear and convincing evidence. c. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt. d. Proof beyond all doubt.

Question

Hope Davila

Business

20 July, 21:01

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) makes it illegal for US citizens to bribe high ranking foreign officials to get new business. A violation can have a criminal penalty that involves up to five years in prison. If Phil were to be found to be in violation of the FCPA, what standard of proof would be needed for a criminal conviction? a. Preponderance of the evidence. b. Clear and convincing evidence. c. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt. d. Proof beyond all doubt.

+5

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Dayton Webb · Answer 1

Answer: "C:

Explanation:

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a stage at which the judge is very sure that an offense was actually committed by an accused, based on solid evidences.

A reasonable doubt level is the stage in prosecution where the prosecutor is not able to establish with facts that an accuse is guilty. So to be declared guilty, the prosecutor should go beyond this stage with enough evidences to proof his case.

The due process ensures that an accuse in not convicted unless this stage is achieved.