Proof beyond a reasonable doubt (BARD) is one of the most fundamental requirements of American criminal law and other legal systems. Professor Larry Laudan has criticised this requirement for several reasons. His main contention is that the BARD formula converts evidential support into subjective confidence, and is therefore not a genuine standard of proof. At the same time, Laudan holds that BARD produces a large number of guilty defendant’s acquittals due to its excessive demand for evidence. The aim of this article is to show that Laudan’s argument regarding the number of guilty defendant’s acquittals is unacceptable. Perhaps the real ratio of false negatives to false positives were what Laudan holds them to be, yet he fails to provide any suitable argument to support his claim, or to attribute the alleged frequency of errors to a particular standard of proof—BARD or otherwise.

中文翻译：

---

劳丹的错误：有罪的人的合理怀疑和无罪释放

排除合理怀疑的证据 (BARD) 是美国刑法和其他法律体系最基本的要求之一。拉里·劳丹教授出于多种原因批评了这一要求。他的主要论点是 BARD 公式将证据支持转化为主观信心，因此不是真正的证明标准。同时，劳丹认为，由于对证据的过度要求，BARD制造了大量有罪被告的无罪释放。本文的目的是表明劳丹关于有罪被告无罪释放数量的论点是不可接受的。或许假阴性与假阳性的真实比例是劳丹认为的，但他未能提供任何合适的论据来支持他的主张，