Discuss what you believe to be the legal differences of these standards of proof: preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing, and beyond a reasonable doubt.

ANSWER DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
At the beginning of the module, you were required to read “Standards of Proof Revisited,” by Kevin Clermont. Having read the article:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1321029
Discuss what you believe to be the legal differences of these standards of proof: preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing, and beyond a reasonable doubt.
Discuss your opinion as to whether these three different standards of proof are applied correctly by jurors in our judicial system today.
Discuss your opinion as to whether jury instructions assist jurors in the application of these burdens of proof to properly determine the case at hand.
Read the case of Rattray v. City of National City, 36 F3d 1480 (1994). This case is attached.
As you read this case, focus on the clear and convincing evidence standard vs. the preponderance of evidence standard discussed. Discuss your opinion of this case. Do you agree with the court’s ruling? If you agree, state with specificity why. If you do not agree, state with specificity why. What is your opinion of Judge Hug’s dissenting opinion with respect to the clear and convincing evidence standard vs. the preponderance of evidence standard.

Last Completed Projects