SEC Charges Eleven in Stock Manipulation Ring

[Qone0]

and a civil suit often has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence that was determined in a related criminal suit.....

think OJ Simpson.....

The difference between a criminal and civil is the burden of proof.

A criminal case criminal conviction will almost always result in a civil conviction because the criminal burden of proof is so much higher than a civil case. But a criminal "not guilty" can result in a civil conviction as in the OJ case.

Beyond reasonable doubt

This is the standard required by the prosecution in most criminal cases within an adversarial system and is the highest level of burden of persuasion. This means that the proposition being presented by the government must be proven to the extent that there is no "reasonable doubt" in the mind of a reasonable person that the defendant is guilty. There can still be a doubt, but only to the extent that it would not affect a "reasonable person's" belief that the defendant is guilty. If the doubt that is raised does affect a "reasonable person's" belief that the defendant is guilty, the jury is not satisfied beyond a "reasonable doubt". The precise meaning of words such as "reasonable" and "doubt" are usually defined within jurisprudence of the applicable country.

Preponderance of the evidence
Preponderance of the evidence, also known as balance of probabilities is the standard required in most civil cases. The standard is met if the proposition is more likely to be true than not true. Effectively, the standard is satisfied if there is greater than 50 percent chance that the proposition is true.