[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Some time ago, I posted my opinion regarding where you draw the line in "never guessing an out". There are any number of times that we just have to make a call, because everything tells us it was an out, but we don't have the perfect angle to see it. I compared it then to court cases; civil cases decided by "a preponderance of evidence", and criminal cases by "beyond a reasonable doubt".

My point here is that we make our own judgment calls based on a preponderance of evidence, but to advise your partner to change a call, you need to be sure; sure enough to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

Honestly, I've never heard anyone use this explanation, so maybe I'm off base compared to what others believe. But it has stood me well over the years. Hope it helps you with your quandary.

I completely agree with you on your thinking. I don't think I've ever heard it in legal speak, but it makes sense.