When someone is accused of doing something wrong, it is not uncommon for that person to try to get away, regardless of whether or not the person is guilty. The threat of being arrested can trigger a person’s “fight-or-flight” survival instinct, which can make the person believe that running away is good idea. Unfortunately for two men in Memphis accused of robbery, their “flight” only led to more trouble.
After the two men allegedly robbed a T-mobile store in Memphis, they fled the scene in a car with law enforcement chasing close behind them. The chase went on for 99 miles, starting in Tennessee, and then crossing into two other states. The two men were eventually stopped using spike strips. Even though police suspect evidence was thrown out the vehicle, one man was charged with receiving stolen property, resisting arrest by fleeing and armed criminal action. The other man was charged with receiving stolen property.
When a defendant is placed on trial for a theft crime or any other crime, the government must prove that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is any reasonable doubt, then a defendant cannot be convicted.
For instance, in a robbery case, like the one above, the government must show the defendant took the property of another in his or her presence and against his or her will. It must also be shown that this was done by threat of violence, and that the defendant had the intent to steal the property. The defendant cannot be found guilty if the government fails to meet its burden, that is, if there is any reasonable doubt as to whether any of those elements have been met. As a result, a defendant does not have to convince an entire jury that he is innocent. He only needs reasonable doubt to exist.
Source: KFVS12.com, “Two men arrested after multi-state police chase,” March 13, 2013
