Amy is suing Chad in a tort action for property damages and personal injuries she sustained when Chad negligently ran a red light and crashed into her in a busy intersection. Amy must convince the jury that the light was red and that her injuries were caused by the crash. How convinced must the jurors be that Chad is at fault in order to find Chad liable?

Question

Helen

Social Studies

23 July, 18:31

Amy is suing Chad in a tort action for property damages and personal injuries she sustained when Chad negligently ran a red light and crashed into her in a busy intersection. Amy must convince the jury that the light was red and that her injuries were caused by the crash. How convinced must the jurors be that Chad is at fault in order to find Chad liable?

+4

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Cullen Clay · Answer 1

They must be convinced by a preponderance of the evidence.

Explanation:

In a civil suit, preponderance of the evidence would require a piece of evidence which outweighs other pieces of evidence which might be greater in number or amount but will not be as accurate. An admissible CCTV recording showing Chad running a red light would be enough to convince the jury in this case.

By contrast, 'beyond reasonable doubt' requires a more strict examination of all evidence presented in order to convict in a criminal trial.