A more thorough explanation:

Definition: Risk of jury doubt refers to the burden of persuasion that a party has to convince the fact-finder (jury or judge) to view the facts in a way that favors that party. In simpler terms, it means that a party has to prove their case to the jury or judge.

In civil cases, the plaintiff has the burden of persuasion, and they have to prove their case by a preponderance of the evidence. This means that they have to show that it is more likely than not that their version of the facts is true. For example, in a car accident case, the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant was negligent and caused the accident.

In criminal cases, the prosecution has the burden of persuasion, and they have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. This means that they have to show that there is no other reasonable explanation for the defendant's actions other than that they committed the crime. For example, in a murder case, the prosecution has to prove that the defendant intentionally killed the victim.

Examples:

• In a civil case, the plaintiff has to prove that the defendant breached their duty of care and caused the plaintiff's injuries. If the plaintiff fails to convince the jury that the defendant was negligent, there is a risk of jury doubt, and the plaintiff may lose the case.
• In a criminal case, the prosecution has to prove that the defendant committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. If the prosecution fails to convince the jury that the defendant is guilty, there is a risk of jury doubt, and the defendant may be acquitted.

These examples illustrate the concept of risk of jury doubt, which is the risk that a party faces when they have to prove their case to the jury or judge. If the party fails to meet their burden of persuasion, there is a risk that the jury or judge will doubt their version of the facts and rule against them.