与民事诉讼中“优势证据”（preponderance of evidence）原则不同，刑事诉讼中确立的证据标准被称为“排除合理怀疑”，即陪审团只有在检方提出的证据能够排除所有合理的怀疑之后，才可以判定被告人有罪。换言之，如果陪审员（作为一名正常的、谨慎的人）对被告人是否犯罪仍存有合乎情理的怀疑，则陪审团会认为检察机关提供的证据还没有达到“排除合理怀疑”的标准，就会判定被告人无罪。
例1: If the Grand Jury indicts the individual, the individual has the right to a speedy trial by jury where the state would have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
如果大陪审团指控某人犯罪，则被告人有权获得陪审团快速审判的权利，且有关州（公诉机关）必须证明该案排除了合理怀疑。
例2：In light of the seriousness of the penalties for violating a criminal law, both the Constitution and statutory law – federal and state codes – impose strict sets of procedural rules to ensure that persons who are accused of criminal acts are tried fairly and convicted only if guilt has been established beyond a reasonable doubt.
由于违反刑法的处罚严重，宪法和制定法 – 联邦法典和州法典 – 都规定了严格的程序原则来确保被指控有犯罪行为的人得到公正的审判，并且只有达到排除了合理怀疑程度，才可做出有罪判决。
例3 Criminal defendants are presumed innocent. The state must overcome this presumption of innocence by proving every element of the offense charged against the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt to the satisfaction of all the jurors.
刑事被告人是被推定无罪的。国家要想推翻这一无罪推定，必须通过证明被告人被控犯罪的每一构成要件都排除合理怀疑，从而让所有陪审员满意。
这就是美国法律中降低将无罪的人定罪这一风险的最主要的方法。
[DTDinfo id=”核心术语-B”]