Understanding the Burden of Proof in New Jersey Criminal Trials

Understanding the Burden of Proof in New Jersey Criminal Trials

So you’ve been charged with a crime in New Jersey? That totally sucks. Let me break down how the burden of proof works in criminal trials here so you can understand what the prosecution needs to prove for a conviction. I’ll try to keep it simple and empathetic since this is likely a stressful time.

The very basis of our criminal justice system is the presumption of innocence – you are innocent until proven guilty. So the burden is entirely on the prosecution to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you committed the crime as charged. What does “beyond a reasonable doubt” mean though? Basically it means what any reasonable person would find convincing enough to make an important decision in their own lives, with no lingering or substantial doubts. That’s a high bar to clear.

The prosecution needs to present compelling evidence that you committed all the elements of the particular crime. For example, for a basic theft charge they’d need to show 1) you took property, 2) that belonged to someone else, 3) you knew it belonged to someone else, and 4) you intended to deprive them of it permanently. If reasonable doubt exists on any single element, you must be found not guilty.

Unlike civil cases which use the lower “preponderance of evidence” standard, criminal cases require evidence that leaves virtually no doubt at all that you committed the crime. So if the prosecution’s evidence is contradictory, incomplete, relies heavily on circumstantial inferences, or traces back to less-than-credible witnesses, reasonable doubt likely exists.

Your defense attorney’s job is to poke holes in the prosecution’s version of events and evidence. If your attorney can show logical gaps or present alternative explanations that align reasonably with the evidence, that introduces reasonable doubt. Your attorney may also provide affirmative evidence of your innocence – like an alibi, other eyewitnesses who contradict the prosecution’s witnesses, or expert testimony questioning the prosecution’s forensic evidence conclusions.

The burden is always on the prosecution though – you do not need to prove your innocence. You can simply argue the prosecution failed to eliminate all reasonable doubt. The jury cannot convict you based on a hunch or because they generally think you seem suspicious or untrustworthy. Many cases end in acquittals because while the defendant seems probably guilty, the evidence fails to eliminate reasonable doubt.

So in summary, the prosecution must conclusively prove all elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt based on compelling, consistent evidence pointing clearly to your guilt. If they fail to do so on even one element, you cannot be convicted. Your defense attorney will work to show the jury that reasonable doubt still exists. This high burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt underlies the core principle of “innocent until proven guilty”.