STOP SEEING INTRUSIVE ADS, & HAVE PREMIUM FEATURES? Stop seeing intrusive ads and have a smoother reading experience, once you sign up on Judicial Poetry. Sign up now!

IMPORTANCE OF PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Yusuf v. State (2026): ‘Proof beyond reasonable doubt is important because it helps to ensure that innocent people are not wrongly convicted, ensure that the guilty are held accountable for their crimes and helps to maintain public trust in the justice system by ensuring the convictions are based on reliable evidence.’

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

reasonable doubt

WHAT REASONABLE DOUBT MEANS IN CRIMINAL TRIAL

The term “Reasonable doubt” has not been defined in the definitions Section 2 of the Act, but its connotation has received many definitions from judicial authorities. For instance, the very famous and erudite Denning, J (later M.R.) in the case of MILLER V. MINISTER OF PENSIONS (1947) 2 ALL E.R. 372 said that- “It need...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

Dibie v. The State (2007) LPELR 941 (SC) said thus: “Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond every shadow of doubt. Once the proof drowns the presumption of innocence of the accused, the Court is entitled to convict him, although there exist shadows of doubt. The moment the proof by prosecution renders the...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

WHEN A CASE IS SAID TO BE PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

It must however, be emphasized that the burden of proof of the guilt of an accused person beyond reasonable doubt by the Prosecution in criminal cases should not be taken to mean that the prosecution must sustain its case beyond every shadow of doubt. Absolute certainty is impossible in any human adventure including the administration...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY IS NOT REQUIRED FOR CONVICTION IN CRIMINAL CASES

It can be discerned from these cases that though certainty is an essential element of proof in criminal liability or guilt, absolute certainly is not required because it is “impossible in any human adventure including the administration of criminal justice.” That’s one reason why the requirement of standard of proof placed on the prosecution is...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

BURDEN ON PROSECUTION – STANDARD OF PROOF IS REASONABLE DOUBT

The standard of proof required in a murder case as in all criminal cases is proof beyond reasonable doubt. The onus of proof is on the prosecution and not on the defence. It is after the prosecution has produced necessary evidence to establish its case that the burden shifts unto the defence if he has...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT DOES NOT PROOF BEYOND SHADOW OF DOUBT

However, the required proof beyond reasonable doubt which the prosecution is expected to show does not mean proof beyond all shadow of doubt and the evidence adduced by the prosecution is strong enough against a man, as to leave only a remote probability in his favour, which can be dismissed with the sentence; “of course...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

No more related dictum to show.