The standard of proof beyond rea sonable doubt: Review and Analysis of Colombia's Supreme Court Decision of October 26, 2011

This paper aims to show that the standard of "proof beyond reasonable doubt" to render a guilty verdict, is not a mere bombastic expression or a whim of the legislator (Articles 7 and 381 of Law 906 of 2004), but a legal requirement that can be demonstrate and controllable, as long as the Judges and the actors in the judicial system continue deepening in their studies on issues related to logic, epistemology and semiotics. This requirement, in practice, results in the understanding of two limitations: i) The criminal proceeding as a reconstruction of a probable truth and not a certainty, and ii) that the presumption of innocence is a law requirement and not a mere psychological state of mind of the judge.