Nessie's hierarchy of evidence and standard of proof

[Keen]

Recently, Nessie has made the following statements on this forum:

I assert the proposition of mass murders is true, because of the evidence to prove it is true... The reason why the mass murder of millions of Jews had been settled as fact, is because of the evidence... You have cherry picked the weakest form of evidence of all... What is the evidential value... There is indeed a hierarchy of evidence.

So Nessie is claiming that there are different forms of evidence, some weaker than others, and these varying forms of evidence can be aranged in a hierarchy depending on their strength or weakness, with stronger forms having more evidential value than weaker forms.

hierarchy:

a system in which people or things are arranged according to their importance

So Nessie, show us the hierarchy of evidence that you use in determining what kind of evidence has more evidential value than another.

Nessie also steadfastly refuses to state what standard of proof he is alleging his "evidence" has "proven."

Different Standards of Proof

A standard of proof refers to the duty of the person responsible for proving the case. There are different standards of proof in different circumstances. The three primary standards of proof are proof beyond a reasonable doubt, preponderance of the evidence and clear and convincing evidence.

Preponderance of the Evidence

This is the lowest standard of proof. It is used primarily in civil proceedings. This standard means that it is more likely than not that the facts are as that which one of the parties claim. In civil cases, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that all of the legal elements were present in the given case. When deciding whether to rule on behalf of the plaintiff or the defendant, the jury weighs each piece of evidence. Jury instructions often state that the jury can use their own judgment in determining the credibility of each piece of evidence and how much weight to assign to each piece of evidence.

Clear and Convincing Evidence

This standard is a step up from the preponderance of the evidence standard. This standard requires that the evidence show that it is highly probable or probably certain that the thing alleged has occurred. This standard may apply to civil cases or some aspects of criminal cases.

Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt refers to the standard of proof in criminal prosecutions. The prosecutor has the duty to convince the jury by proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each and every element of the crime before a jury should convict a defendant. Because a person’s freedom is on the line, the highest standard of proof is used. The United States Supreme Court has specifically stated that it is much worse to convict an innocent person than to allow a guilty one to go free. This standard of proof is specifically required by the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to the federal United States Constiution.

So Nessie:

VI - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; Blacks Law Dictionary defines - Burden of Proof - as: “The necessity or duty of affirmatively proving a fact or facts in dispute on an issue raised between the parties in a cause.” - ??

VII - Is it - True. - or - False. - that; The maxims of law found in Bouvier's Law Dictionary include: “The claimant is always bound to prove: the burden of proof lies on him.” - and - “The burden of the proof lies upon him who affirms, not he who denies.” - ??

[Keen]

Nessie, have you ever stated that:

Huge pits are proven

at Treblinka II?