Originally Posted by mahasamatman

This represents a basic misunderstanding of the American legal system. The verdict does not come even close to saying there was no wrongdoing. It merely reflects the fact that (in the jury's view) the prosecution failed to meet its burden of proof. In a criminal case, guilt must be established "beyond a reasonable doubt". In a civil case, the burden of proof is a "preponderance of evidence", which is a much lower standard. There are many cases where a defendant is cleared of criminal charges, but loses the civil case.


This is perhaps the most naïve statement ever made on FlyerTalk. If it was that easy, nobody would ever suffer assault.