True http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/06/more-probable-than-not-carries-important-legal-meaning/
Yes, "more likely than not" is the standard in civil cases. More than 50% probability.
Of course it is. How could any other standard make sense? If reuven says shimon owes him money, and it is more likely than not that shimon does, then between the two, obviously the money should go to reuven. Because one of them needs to have the money, so it should go to the one it more probably belongs to. Even though we'll be wrong 49% of the time (in cases that are 51-49% likelihood), that is better than being wrong 51% of the time. A false positive is equally bad to a false negative, because somebody is out money wrongfully in either case.
But we would never punish someone in court based on more than 50% probability. Why not--he probably did it? Because we don't want to be incorrectly punishing people in 49% of the criminal cases that are 51-49% likelihood. When we are punishing people, we value false positives more strongly than false negatives.
So, in football cheating scandals, where we smear someone's reputation--are you ok with a false positive rate of 49%? Because if you are not, then you should be signing on to my wiki.
Topic Wiki
