sorry but I'm not applying the wrong test

I am saying one has to query the judgment that "it was more likely than not" that a jury would convict because any reasonable or right thinking jury was never going to convict on the basis of her word against his and with, it appears, little or no other evidence to prove or disprove either party's story.

I accept you could argue that the protection for the accused is that they will get a reasonable jury to hear the case and that reasonable jury will find the accused not guilty as they did in this case and hopefully in most cases that ensures the correct outcome but I am sure that it is not the case all of the time.

Posted By: Jim, Sep 10, 17:00:41