{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog","provider_url":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog","title":"Making Sense of the Standard & Burden of Proof in Hybrid Courts: Reflections on the Common Law & Civil Law Approaches to Proof, Part III-A \u2013 Common Law - michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"PZuGI5UZVx\"><a href=\"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2016\/06\/07\/making-sense-of-standard-burden-of-proof\/\">Making Sense of the Standard &#038; Burden of Proof in Hybrid Courts: Reflections on the Common Law &#038; Civil Law Approaches to Proof, Part III-A \u2013 Common Law<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2016\/06\/07\/making-sense-of-standard-burden-of-proof\/embed\/#?secret=PZuGI5UZVx\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"&#8220;Making Sense of the Standard &#038; Burden of Proof in Hybrid Courts: Reflections on the Common Law &#038; Civil Law Approaches to Proof, Part III-A \u2013 Common Law&#8221; &#8212; michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog\" data-secret=\"PZuGI5UZVx\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"Part III-A &#8212; Common Law Approach Good men everywhere praise the presumption of innocence. And be they Frenchmen, Germans, or Americans, they agree on the demand of the presumption in practice. Both here and abroad, the state\u2019s invocation of criminal sanctions demands a high degree of proof that the accused has committed the offense charged. &hellip; Continue reading \"\"","thumbnail_url":"http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/innocent-until-proven-guilty-300x198.jpg"}