Consider the extent to which burden of proofs conflict with the Essay

Consider the extent to which burden of proofs conflict with the presumption of innocence in slope Law - Essay ExampleIn English Law, the judges use legal precedent and their common sense to formulate the laws. In England, it is possible to bushel or revoke the English common law by the Parliament. A few of the oldest English laws which still exist today include the Distress crook of 1267 and a few sections of the Magna Carta of 1215. W. M. Geldart( p.7, 1918) states We commonly speak both of law and lawsthe English Law, or the Laws of England and these terms, though not used with precision, point to two different aspects chthonian which legal science may be approached. The laws of a country are thought of as separate, distinct, individual rules the law of a country, tho much we may analyze it into separate rules, is something more than the mere sum of such rules. It is rather a whole, a system which orders our conduct in which the separate rules have their postal service and their relation to each other and to the whole which is never completely exhausted by any analysis, however far the analysis may be pushed, and however much the analysis may be necessary to our understanding of the whole.The Presumption of Innocence and the gist of Proof are two very important laws which drop dead to the English Law. The Presumption of Innocence is the right that an impeach gets in most modern countries of the world. Hence, until the persecution can gather further evidence to prove that the accused is guilty, the accused will be deemed as innocent. The prosecution on the other hand has a job which directly conflicts with the Presumption of innocence. Their job is to obtain the The Burden of Proof. So the proof that the prosecution needs to gather has to be convincing enough. This would make the jury pronounce that the accused is guilty without any doubt. unless if there are certain doubts, the accused will be acquitted. The Presumption of Innocence is very simi lar to the Latin principle Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat, hence many turn over it to be based on this