Phoenix, AZ — Some crimes are so horrific that a quick death for the perpetrator feels justified. But our criminal justice system has a fundamental flaw: the standard of proof, “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This nebulous term has become a source of injustice, particularly in capital cases. Having witnessed numerous criminal trials, including those where the death penalty was at stake, I’ve seen firsthand the confusion over what “reasonable doubt” really means. It’s a vague standard that varies from one juror to the next. And when the crime is especially heinous, that ambiguity can lead to false convictions. People, naturally outraged by terrible acts, can be eager to punish, and often that means overlooking the very doubt that should protect the innocent. I’ve come to despise the term “beyond a reasonable doubt,” because I’ve watched as innocent people were convicted, and in other cases, where the convicted might have been innocent. Worse, I’ve seen law enforcement and prosecutors...