Final answer:
In criminal cases such as Leonard's arson charge, the prosecution bears the burden of proof and must demonstrate his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest standard within the legal system. This ensures a fair legal process, given the severity of potential penalties such as loss of freedom or life.
Step-by-step explanation:
Burden of Proof in Criminal Cases
In the case of Leonard being arrested and charged with arson, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. The state must prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the highest standard of proof in the legal system, which means that the evidence presented must be so convincing that there is no reasonable doubt in the mind of the judge or jury that Leonard committed the crime. It should be noted that 'beyond a reasonable doubt' does not mean beyond all possible doubt, but rather that the evidence does not leave room for any reasonable alternative explanations.
In contrast to criminal cases, civil cases require a lower standard of proof, which is a preponderance of the evidence. This means that the plaintiff must simply show that it is more likely than not that the defendant is responsible for the damages or the action in question.
It is important to remember that the burden of proof in criminal cases reflects the serious nature of the potential penalties, which can include loss of liberty or even life. Hence, the proof required reflects the principle that it is better for ten guilty persons to go free than for one innocent person to be wrongly convicted.