I know its being pedantic but "Reasonable Belief" and "Reasonable Doubt" are 2 connected but entirely different definitions:rubberbond wrote:Well put, demand that they orove it beyond a reasonable doubt. What if you get back from your duty to find the thing on the bench,which is not uncommon, there are so many defences to this absurd process, if only people stopped accepting management bullyingfishtank wrote:Don't know how many times this needs to be said.iHateD2Ds wrote:How can It be proven.......
Burden of proof is for courts and lawyers, all that's required here is reasonable belief.
What's the missort rate for Tracked items?, even if it was as high as 10% which it isn't that would still leave a 90% probability that the OP had the item, that's reasonable belief.
A reasonable belief is simply that, on balance with the information provided a reasonable person with the same information would come to the same decision. There is no legal level of evidence or proof needed. Whereas "Reasonable Doubt" means that if the evidence provided in a case does not remove all reasonable doubt then you must find the person not guilty.
As an example see the picture below. For an employment tribunal or a conduct code the level of guilty would be somewhere between "Perhaps" and "Suspected".
