James Glissan

This has to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

And the courts have been very careful to not read too much into what that phrase means.

Now, it's the highest test that we have in our system in terms of what you are required to do to prove something.

But if you break the words down, it kind of brings light to it by itself.

If there is a reasonable doubt...

then you can't find them guilty.

I knew you were going to ask that question.

Okay, what are the guidelines around it?

What would the judge be saying to the jury?

Yeah.

Okay.

So that's a great question.

So when we're talking about these things, it's not necessarily left up to the jury to interpret it themselves.

No.

The judge will give them directions as to whether or not, or rather how to apply the test when it comes to issues of law.

It's up to the jury to decide what happened and what didn't happen, but it's up to the judge to make sure that the law is being complied with really.

Yeah.

So when you're looking at a reasonable doubt, the simplest, most easy way to understand it is if you have a thought in your mind, just the tiniest little doubt in your mind, and it's possible that that doubt is true, then you must find them not guilty.

And that extends.

So without going into a full legal lecture, which I promised I wouldn't do, when you have somebody who then brings their own case, because remember, Ben doesn't have to say anything.