The presumption of innocence as rule of judgment and the standard of proof of the reasonable doubt in the criminal procedure. A reading from Colombia and Chile

3Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This paper intends to show the relationship of the standard of proof in the criminal process to issue a condemnatory sentence with the presumption of innocence as a probative and trial rule. From recognizing the legal transplant of a standard of evidence of the common law system, applied by juries that have no duty of motivation, the thesis is posed as the need to move towards a greater objectivity of the proof standard in a continental system, which is directly related to the necessary motivation of the judicial decision, especially from the trial assessment trial that allows reaching that degree of knowledge to condemn (beyond a reasonable doubt) and, consequently, distort the presumption of innocence (as a rule of judgement).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rúa, M. B., & Vélez, D. P. (2018). The presumption of innocence as rule of judgment and the standard of proof of the reasonable doubt in the criminal procedure. A reading from Colombia and Chile. Ius et Praxis, 24(3), 651–692. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-00122018000300651

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free