Are Civil Lawsuits Easier Than Criminal Trials?

There are many similarities between a trial undertaken to determine criminal charges, and a civil lawsuit. In both trials, there is one person or group, known as the defendant, that is being accused of something. In both cases, this also means that a verdict must be reached about whether the defendant is or is not responsible for the accusation being laid out. And finally, in many cases, a jury is present, and they are presented with arguments, facts, evidence, and outlined penalties for violating a law, before they go off, discuss among themselves, and finally return with a verdict.

However, the one very significant way that criminal and civil trials diverge is in what is required to reach a verdict. A criminal trial normally requires the jury to be beyond all reasonable doubt on reaching a verdict. A civil trial goes by a preponderance of the evidence, which can be more lenient. But what does this mean?

The Final Stakes

The most important reason the method of deciding a verdict differs is because of the outcome. A criminal charge in Florida may be punished with a comparative “slap on the wrist,” such as a fine, but can go all the way up to lengthy jail sentences and even capital punishment, with execution by lethal injection, or the electric chair.

Civil trials, on the other hand, always end with a single outcome; financial compensation. When someone is found liable in a lawsuit, all that is required is the payment of whatever amount was cited in the lawsuit itself. There are no further repercussions.

Certainty Matters

Because of the seriousness of the consequences involved if someone is found guilty, versus when someone is found liable, a jury must, in theory, be sure of the decision they are making when they arrive at it. This is why the jury is instructed to come to a guilty verdict only if they believe that the verdict is valid beyond all reasonable doubt. In other words, if there is still some legitimate reason to believe that a person may not be guilty, that should be enough to choose a verdict of “not guilty” instead.

With a lawsuit, the basis for a verdict comes from the preponderance of the evidence. What this means is that if there is a reasonable certainty that the lawsuit is true, then the jury may reach a verdict of liable, and the plaintiff will be awarded the financial damages being sought. In this case, if the jury believes that the lawsuit argument, the evidence presented, witness and expert testimony all amount to greater than 50% likelihood, they can decide a defendant is liable. This is in contrast to a criminal trial, where “beyond all reasonable doubt” implies certainty closer to 98-99%.

This is why if you are thinking of undertaking a lawsuit, you should always seek the advice of an experienced personal injury attorney. They have the knowledge, experience, and business/legal/medical connections to investigate your case, gather relevant witnesses, collect evidence, get expert testimony if required, and package it all together for a compelling argument that can give the jury what they need to arrive at the correct verdict.