In a civil case, a plaintiff wins a lawsuit if he is 51 percent convincing, and collects 100 percent of his damages. In a criminal case the prosecutor must prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt. Why is there such a significant difference in the burden of proof between civil and criminal cases?
a. The burden is higher in a criminal case because the consequences that the defendant faces are more severe.
b. The burden is lower in a civil case because society wants to encourage litigation; it is the best way to resolve disputes.
c. The burden is higher in a criminal case because we want to make sure that we find more defendants guilty even if it risks putting innocent people behind bars.
d. The burden is lower in a civil case because the plaintiff has to pay both his own and the defendant’s legal fees.

answer; inductive techniques;

the answer is the petition of right.

explanation:

offer to of right, real demand of attesting a benefit against the english crown, the most remarkable point of reference being the petition of right of 1628, which parliament sent to charles i fussing of a movement of oversteps of law. the term also implied the framework (invalidated in 1947) by which a subject could sue the crown.   taking a gander at the frameworks used by maria amidu to make a standard in 2015 commending the 1628 petition of right, which was sent to charles i by the english parliament. at uniquely based law the crown, or the sovereign in his official cutoff, couldn't be sued in the ruler's courts. since the ruler was, really, the superior ace of those courts, coordinating value in them between his subjects, he was not subject to their ward. therefore it transformed into a preparation, at whatever point a subject's certified or individual property had come into the responsibility for ruler or his specialists without legitimate perfect, for the subject to engage the master in chamber for its recovery.

answer; menopause;

i believe that's b. popular sovereignty