Onus of Proof Principle

Important: GDPR Email Preferences

As you may already know, the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will be coming into effect on 25th May 2018. We take your privacy seriously and we are working hard to ensure we comply with the new data protection laws. You can find out more about how we're doing this in our privacy policy on our website.

We want to make sure you continue to receive the latest newsletters, blogs, special offers and more.

As someone who has opted-in to receive our emails in the past, we’d like to give you this opportunity to confirm what you wish to receive:

Just so you know, if you don’t let us know what kinds of emails you want to receive from us, we’ll stop emailing you on the 24th May 2018 - you'll be missing out!

You are of course free to change your mind at any time – just follow the link at the bottom of any of our emails.

Advert

There is a principle of logic that says that the onus of proof is on the prosecution. The onus of proof is not on the accused.

The accused does not need to prove his/her innocence. The person who is making (or implying) an accusation, is the one who must prove their case.

Paula Radcliffe is suffering from implied allegations of misdeeds. Paula is making a tactical error, in that she is trying to prove her innocence. This is an error, both tactically and logically.

Logically it is an error, because you cannot prove a negative. Since, if nothing happened, then it leaves no clues. Only if something happened does it leave clues. You cannot prove that you didn't do something wrong.

For example, if I said to you, "I accuse you of being a shoplifter who has never been caught. Prove that you are not."

Then you would not be able to prove that you have not ever been a shoplifter. I could say that the absence of evidence of you shoplifting, merely goes to show how skilful you are at avoiding detection.

It is impossible to prove innocence. That is why, in our law courts, you don't have to prove yourself innocent. The prosecution has to prove you guilty, beyond all reasonable doubt.

In the press and on the TV, they break this rule and make assertions, which tantamount to allegations, that X is "Linked to drugs".

The implication is left unsupported and the victim, the athlete, then feels forced to come out and try to deny the allegation.

Paula tried to prove her innocence. But in the act of protesting her innocence, she unwittingly reinforces in the public consciousness, the connection between drugs and her name. Her denial then becomes more fodder for the press to print the following day, to comment on and to further fuel the speculation that she may have something to hide.

They say her denials do not prove her innocence and so that again implies guilt. This is unfair, unjust and illogical.

Those people who are the victims of such smears should invoke the 'onus of proof principle'.

They should not attempt to prove their innocence; which cannot be done. They should challenge their accusers to put up, or shut up.

They should assert their innocence without any attempt to prove it. They should threaten legal action against anyone who claims or suggests, without evidence, that they have committed wrong doing.

Paula, please don't play the press by their rules. Please don't try to prove your innocence - you are innocent until you have been proven guilty.

It is up to your accusers to prove you guilty; not for you to prove you're not guilty. Paula, please apply the onus of proof principle to your accusers.

Stay strong.

Blogs by Email

Do you want to receive an email whenever we post a new blog? The blogs contain article 5-10 minutes long - ideal for reading during your coffee break!

Your Comments

Further Reading in General Development

• How to gain more confidence as a new manager
  How to gain more confidence as a manager Are you just starting out in the role of leader or manager? If yes, then you would probably agree that it is sometimes difficult to feel as confident as you would like to feel. You may lack confidence because your situation is new...
  Read Article >
• Don't you trust me?
  Handling difficult people: "Don't you trust me?" Trust Last week a female delegate on my course asked me a good question relating to the issue of trust. She said, "Can I ask you a question related to trust? I don't know how to handle the situation when my daughter, or anyone...
  Read Article >
• Seven skills of management training
  Seven skills of management training Management training is training that will teach your leader-managers the must-have skills, knowledge, attitudes, and attributes they need to acquire, if they are to get the very best performance from themselves and the rest of the team. Management training is important for your organisation because the...
  Read Article >
• Take Back Control
  If you have not succeeded as well as you would have liked, how do you explain that? Is it because of your parents, your boss, your friends, the government, or God, or just bad luck, or is it down to yourself?
  Read Article >
• What Could you Learn from Socrates, Plato and Aristotle?
  What Could You Learn from Socrates, Plato and Aristotle? I am guessing that you have heard the names Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. You probably know that they are the three most famous philosophers in history. But unless you have made it a special study, you may not know much about what...
  Read Article >