Editing Reasonable doubt (section)

===Canada===
The Supreme Court of Canada has emphasized that jurors should be told the prosecution bears the entire burden and that the doubt must be based on reason and common sense. In ''R. v. Lifchus,'' the Court advised jurors that absolute certainty is not required, only that they be “sure” based on the evidence, and that proof of probable guilt is insufficient.<ref name=Lifchus>{{Cite court
  |litigants = R. v. Lifchus
  |vol = [1997] 3
  |reporter = SCR
  |opinion = 320
  |court = SCC
  |date = 1997
  |url=http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1997/1997canlii319/1997canlii319.html
 }}</ref> Later cases, such as ''R. v. Starr,'' clarified that “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” lies much closer to absolute certainty than to a balance of probabilities.<ref name=Starr>{{Cite court
  |litigants = R. v. Starr
  |vol = [2000] 2
  |reporter = SCR
  |opinion = 144
  |pinpoint = 242
  |court = SCC
  |date = 2000
  |url=http://canlii.ca/en/ca/scc/doc/2000/2000scc40/2000scc40.html
 }}</ref>