Which outcome requires the highest standard of proof?

The highest standard of proof is required for criminal convictions. In criminal cases, the prosecution must establish the defendant's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt," which is a stringent standard reflecting the serious consequences of a criminal conviction, such as imprisonment or significant penalties. This high threshold is designed to protect individuals from wrongful convictions and ensure that only those who are fully proven guilty are punished.

In contrast, civil disputes typically require a lower standard of proof known as "preponderance of the evidence," meaning that one side's evidence must be more convincing than the other's. Administrative rulings often operate under standards like "substantial evidence," which does not require the same level of certainty as criminal cases. Traffic offenses, while they can lead to fines and penalties, generally have an even lower standard of proof compared to criminal convictions, often focused on whether the evidence supports a finding of violation rather than meeting the stringent criminal standard. Thus, criminal convictions undeniably require the highest standard of proof among the mentioned options.