The standard of proof for all Coroner's Court decisions, including unlawful killing, has been 'the balance of probabilities' since a
Supreme Court judgement in November 2020. Conversely Mr Hill's acquittal reflects the higher test of 'beyond reasonable doubt' applicable to criminal proceedings. What this verdict does is confirm that it was more likely than not Mr Hill's fault that the bystanders were killed, and that he very likely owes his freedom to his lawyers and the 'cognitive impairment' argument authored by his non-AvMed qualified paediatrician friend, which the jury evidently considered as having introduced reasonable doubt at his criminal trial.