A aplicação do in dubio pro societate na jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal: uma pesquisa empírica

In jury trials, Brazilian courts apply, during the first phase of the trial by jury, the legal maxim in dubio pro societate. Such practice sparks academic and jurisprudence controversies. How has the Supreme Federal Court (STF) applied and interpreted the principle of in dubio pro societate in its rulings? The research unfolds through qualitative analysis of 37 judicial cases from the STF on the subject. This research reached the following conclusions: there is no express constitutional provision for in dubio pro societate, it being a jurisprudential construct related to the constitutional competence of the jury; the evidence supporting the decision at the end of the first phase of the procedure, regarding the person who committed the crime, must be the evidence produced under the scrutiny of adversarial proceedings, with decisions solely supported by elements gathered in the investigation being prohibited; the standard of proof required to consider indications of the author of an offense is the preponderance of evidence, that is the set of evidence incriminating the accused must outweigh the evidence that would exonerate them, justifying their submission to trial by jury.