The Three-Verdict Problem

23 Pages Posted: 10 Oct 2024 Last revised: 25 Nov 2024

See all articles by Jack Whiteley

Jack Whiteley

University of Minnesota School of Law

Date Written: October 07, 2024

Abstract

In Scotland, for hundreds of years, juries have chosen between three criminal verdicts: "guilty," "not guilty," and "not proven." The "not proven" verdict's legal meaning remains mysterious. In this article, I aim to describe and solve the problem. Applying modern ideas about standards of proof to the intellectual history of "not proven" yields eight plausible meanings for the verdict. With the extent of the problem in mind, I offer a solution. In the three-verdict system, jurors should deliver a "guilty" verdict when they believe the accused has committed the crime, and a "not guilty" verdict when they believe the accused has not committed the crime. The "not proven" verdict is for all other states of mind. Clarifying this question matters for determining whether the verdict's existence is just. It also offers some evidence for how the criminal standard of proof works in other legal systems.

Keywords: jurisprudence, evidence, standards of proof

JEL Classification: K41

Suggested Citation

Whiteley, Jack, The Three-Verdict Problem (October 07, 2024). Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 24-41, Legal Theory (2024), 1-23, Legal Theory, 0[10.1017/S1352325224000090], Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4981759 or http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1352325224000090

Jack Whiteley (Contact Author)

University of Minnesota School of Law ( email )

United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
52
Abstract Views
317
Rank
753,477
PlumX Metrics