In most countries that follow the Anglo-American legal system, the criminal process is based on the existence of only two possible alternative legal outcomes – “guilty” and “not guilty” – at the end of a criminal proceeding. That is, a person is acquitted unless the court finds him to be guilty. In contrast, a small number of legal systems, such as those of Scotland, Italy, and Israel, maintain an additional form of acquittal, situated between the two stated polar options. In this paper we review the criminal systems that have adopted more than one type of acquittal while delving specifically into the case of Israel. From a descriptive perspective, we summarize the history of their acquittal options as well as describe the additional option’s characteristics when compared to full acquittal as well as the epistemic circumstances in which such an outcome is reached. From a normative perspective, we reject incorporation of this additional type of acquittal due to differences in its expressive implications from full acquittal. We articulate our doubts regarding its necessity and constitutionality, which we do while also addressing the difficulties that this type of verdict engenders. Our main contention is that recognition of this type of acquittal, alongside full acquittal, erodes the fundamental premises of criminal law, contradicts its position regarding the defendant’s innocence at the heart of the criminal proceeding, and therefore undermines this proceeding’s normative and moral commitment to the defendant’s basic rights.

中文翻译：

---

两种无罪宣判——不同的怀疑

在大多数遵循英美法律制度的国家中，刑事诉讼程序的基础是在刑事诉讼结束时只有两种可能的替代法律结果——“有罪”和“无罪”。也就是说，除非法庭认定某人有罪，否则他将被无罪释放。相比之下，少数法律体系，例如苏格兰、意大利和以色列的法律体系，保留了一种额外的无罪释放形式，位于两个陈述的极地选项之间。在本文中，我们回顾了采用不止一种无罪释放方式的刑事制度，同时专门研究了以色列的案例。从描述的角度来看，我们总结了他们的无罪释放选项的历史，并描述了与完全无罪释放相比的附加选项的特征以及达到这种结果的认知环境。从规范的角度来看，我们拒绝纳入这种额外类型的无罪释放，因为它与完全无罪释放的表达含义不同。我们表达了我们对其必要性和合宪性的怀疑，我们这样做的同时也解决了此类判决带来的困难。我们的主要论点是，承认这种类型的无罪释放，连同完全无罪释放，侵蚀了刑法的基本前提，与刑事诉讼程序核心关于被告无罪的立场相矛盾，