To some lawyers, all facts are created equal.
There is no such thing as absolute proof. There is only evidence.
If it doesn't fit, you must acquit.
People in general have no notion of the sort and amount of evidence often needed to prove the simplest matter of fact.
…the burden of proof rests always upon the advocates of change.
By competent evidence, is meant such as the nature of the thing to be proved requires; and by satisfactory evidence, is meant that amount of proof, which ordinarily satisfies an unprejudiced mind, beyond any reasonable doubt.
The rules of evidence in the main are based on experience, logic, and common sense, less hampered by history than some parts of the substantive law.
In trials of fact, by oral testimony, the proper inquiry is not whether is it possible that the testimony may be false, but whether there is sufficient probability that it is true.
