"We Don’t Think It’s Probable": How Courts Turn Criminal Justice into a Guessing Game

Imagine entering a courtroom where the stakes are your freedom, your reputation, and your life. You rest easy knowing that international law guarantees a foundational shield: the Presumption of Innocence. For the state to convict you, the prosecution must clear a mountain called the Standard of Proof—proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

But what happens when the court decides to play a different game?

Recently, we stumbled upon a fascinating piece of legal logic from a district court (Käräjäoikeus) that leaves us scratching our heads in pure, innocent confusion. The verdict states:

“Käräjäoikeus ei myöskään pidä todennäköisenä kokonaistilanne huomioiden, että tikkaiden heittäjä on voinut olla muu henkilö…” > (The district court also does not consider it probable, considering the overall situation, that the ladder thrower could have been another person…)

“Oops, What Kind of Law is This?”

We have a few very simple, almost naive questions for the honorable legal minds.

• Question 1: Since when did the Criminal Code transform into a civil contract dispute? In civil law, judges weigh “probabilities” to decide who owes whom money. In criminal law, if something is merely “probable,” it means it is not certain. And if it is not certain, there is a reasonable doubt. Where did In Dubio Pro Reo go? Did it take a vacation?

• Question 2: The court notes that it wasn’t even argued that someone else threw the ladder. Oh, chess rules! Does this mean the defense now carries the burden of proof to find an Alternative Perpetrator? We thought the prosecution had to prove guilt, not the defense prove a negative, especially when Physical Impossibility is staring everyone in the face.

The “Overall Situation” vs. Immutable Facts

When a court relies on the “overall situation” (kokonaistilanne huomioiden) to decide what is “probable,” it stops looking at hard evidence and starts looking at the weather, impressions, and gossip. It patches up holes in the prosecution’s case with a cozy legal blanket.

If a criminal conviction can rest on what a judge deems “probable,” then we no longer have a justice system. We have a lottery.