In civil actions, they are various standards of proof that a prosecutor must meet in order to prove that an element of the tort has been met (as must a defense lawyer if asserting an affirmative defense). Those standards can vary somewhat state by state or tort by tort, but they are generally summed up as a "preponderance of the evidence." In criminal cases, that standard of proof is raised to the familiar "beyond a reasonable doubt." But there is one particular situation where an even higher standard of proof is required. Can you identify the situation? For bonus points can you point to where this standard is found and what the standard is? This question is limited to American jurisprudence. Read on for a hint. Hint: It would be very difficult for this standard of proof to be changed. Read on for the answer. The crime is treason. The Constitution, in Article III, Section 3, Sentence 2 reads: "No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court." The two witness requirement is unqiue is criminal law and is the only standard of proof that is mentioned in the Constitution.