Innocent or Guilty?

Question

How many people feel that it's "Guilty until proven innocent" instead of "Innocent until proven Guilty"? Explain your answer.

Answer 1

Its all how you look at it. Say for thought a man comes out the store and now the store is also being robbed but they dint get the men who robbed the store instead they got the man who was leaving. Now with in that time he is telling them he did not do it but yet they are still beating him down and kicking him. He goes to court and found guilty but he did not do it. 8 years later they let him lose and say it was a mistake and a misunderstanding. But now he is messed up in the process with no home or family all be cause they thought he was guilty until proven innocent

Answer 2

I believe it is largely depends on who is being prosecuted in our justice system (I'm talking about the U.S.) If they see a black or Latino person, most of the times it will be more like "Guilty until proven innocent". If there is a white person in front of them, especially the "white color" type, "innocent until proven Guilty" is more than likely. Examples: There is a black guy in USP Big Sandy who is currently doing 25 years for carjacking (and there are many more others like him serving same amounts of time for somewhat similar crimes, mostly drugs). They all were considered to be guilty right away, and didn't really have any money for the lawyers to prove otherwise or at least to reduce the sentence. Then few months ago I learned that Jeffrey Skilling (Enron's CEO) received the same amount of time (25 years) for defrauding and impoverishing thousands investors and damaging the US economy. And with him, it was more like "innocent" from the very start; and the court had to spend millions of the taxpayers money to prove him guilty.
It is not fair; but that's the reality.

Answer 3

As a prosecutor, I have particularly strong feelings about this issue.

Throughout the entire series of court hearings involved in a criminal prosecution, the burden is completely on me. The defense does not have to do a thing except request discovery (copies of my file) and show up in court. At trial, I have the burden of producing witnesses and evidence. The defendant does not have to testify or produce any witnesses (and I cannot even mention to the jury that a defendant failed to do either, or there will be a mistrial). Moreover, I must convince twelve jurors of a defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If even one disagrees or cannot make a decision, there is no conviction.

So I do not believe that "guilty until proven innocent" exists in a courtroom.

Outside the courtroom, however, is a completely different story. A person who is charged with a crime is, by public perception, "probably guilty." And that person understandibly feels compelled to prove his/her innocence to family/friends/co-workers/media etc. who have already decided their guilt simply because they are charged with a crime. And that is unfair.

A defendant under those circumstances certainly feels like he/she must prove their innocence. But that pressure is obviously not being imposed by the legal system. It is being imposed by the defendant's friends/family/co-workers/peers and the media. And therein is the flaw...

Answer 4

I still feel that it is innocent until proven guilty. However, that being said, I am somewhat alarmed at the state of certain police forces in this country. To site a few, those of Denver Colorado and New York City both have a terrible records in recent times when it comes to race relations and racial profiling. I do not think all police forces or courts are like this, but there are some that most assuredly have to get their acts together.

Answer 5

From a civilian point of view I have to say INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY,

But from the COPS Point of view I'm sure it'll be GUILTY until PROVEN INNOCENT

Answer 6

guilty guilty until proven innocent