DWI and DUI Defense Lawyer and Attorney

by Frankenstein

I love the internet. The kids are constantly pushing the internet envelope. Between my son posting YouTube videos, or my daughter proving me wrong with Wikipedia, we are children flowing with, and creating media. Recently my other son (yah I managed to get four kids) started an argument with my lady over who was popular – Kelly Clarkson or Carrie Underwood. It triggered my son telling my partner to get a “Google Fight” … I said, “what?”… so he demonstrated (how clever of Google)that they was right about Kelly. Anyway, it’s an incredible tool, and I believe opening and share information instantly has been evolving the world we live in.

My son “proving” us wrong with the Google Fight brings to mind amounts of legal proof. Do not have the ease or luxury of determining guilt or innocence over the internet (thank God!!).

People love to talk about guilt and innocence. Who’s guilty and that is not guilty? But what exactly are they discussing? Is he discussing legal guilt or factual guilt? Doing work on the planet of legal guilt. Whether someone did the crime are a wide unknown for all of us? I wasn’t there, we do not possess a time machine, and honestly it does not matter towards the legislation. Within the legal world we offer amounts of legal proof. It is precisely what the federal government (the prosecutors) have to provide, to prove their case. Yeah, they’ve got “the Burden of Proof.”

There vary levels used on different situations, and types/areas of law. Within the Fourth Amendment (inside our Bill of Rights) in the Constitution, we are to get Free from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures.

So the First a higher level proof is did police officers have a “Reasonable Suspicion” to make a STOP.

That will do evidence to avoid a car. A moving violation or a non moving equipment violation will often qualify here. BTW An end is a seizure of one’s person. Reasonable suspicion originates from the case of Ohio v. Terry. A shorter rendition of the facts: A Police Sgt. of 25 years experience, who patrols the same neighborhood for decades, notices people who in their opinion don’t belong there (they are already African Americans in a very white area nonetheless they might have been Asian Americans in the Mexican area). He sees them rising and down the block of your number of stores. He notices them stopping, and seeking in the front of just one particular store.

In the Supreme Court’s opinion this was enough PROOF to prevent these people, investigate (ask questions), and frisk them for weapons.

Second degree of Proof is termed “Probable Cause.” It’s enough evidence to make an arrest. This can be enough evidence to strip search your lady or girlfriend (so it hits all-around home). This means the authorities believe a crime is either happening or about to take place. Generally known as Reasonable Cause, would it be reasonable to believe based upon the facts presented that the crime was happening. In the Dwi context this is your odor of alcohol, bad driving pattern, failure at Field Sobriety Exercises, open bottle in the car, etc.

Third level of Proof is called “Preponderance with the Evidence.” This is the civil standard (not really a criminal standard) and is also used to give money derived from one of company or person to another individual. It’s a little bit over 50%. The scales are only tipping abit to one side. This is one way O.J. Simpson can lose on the Civil Trial level but win (be located Not Guilty Legally) in the Criminal Trial level.

Fourth a higher level Proof is called “Substantial Evidence.” That is restricted to license issues that happen to be called Administrative Hearings. Professional licenses (that happen to be considered legally as property) would fall into this category. So a clear case of Professional Misconduct against an experienced license of the CPA, Nurse, Podiatrist, etc. can be assessed by using this standard. Some states utilize a little higher standard called, “Clear and Convincing Evidence.”

Fifth level of Proof is “Clear and Convincing Evidence.” This is enough evidence to commit you to definitely a mental institution or detract the youngster (declare them an unfit parent). Giving these levels a specific number is nearly impossible, but we know it is greater than 50% certainty but something lower than 100% certainty. Also, evidence of evidence some thing than the usual Preponderance Standard but below BRD (Beyond a fair Doubt).

Sixth amount of Proof is named “Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.” It can be truly the foundation of our country’s rich history, and liberation. It is the highest standard of proof. It’s the a higher level proof necessary to declare someone is responsible for a criminal offense. They are now and forever a criminal. Ny State does not have an expungement statute so the black mark stays on the permanent record forever. It is just a more impressive range than Clear and Convincing Evidence but under 100% certainty. Where which may fall can be a Jury or perhaps in the case of a Bench Trial (a non-jury Trial) a Judge.

So that’s all, no Google Fight will resolve legal guilt or legal innocence. A minimum of not even anyway. Therefore we are nevertheless left to doing things the existing fashioned way with Judges and Juries, and dui lawyers protecting the accused in Court of Laws.

Self Defense & Street Fighting Secrets
Got a karate, street fighting, self defense, mma, martial arts or any other type of combat website? 5 year top seller + upsell! More self defense upsells – a sale! More info: http://www.selfdefensecombat.com/affiliates/ Easy Conversions!
Self Defense & Street Fighting Secrets