With the American court system does the fact that a convicted person is found innocent mean he is innocent.?

Question

If a court can convict an innocent person it can release a guilty person.
The motto is when it comes to rape, murder, pedophilia "kill them all and let god sort them out".

Answer 1

If a criminal court, whether judge or jury, finds a person not guilty, then that person is legally not guilty, and they cannot be tried again on that charge. So if a person was previously convicted (If I understand your question correctly), and then later new evidence leads to the court reversing that conviction and finding the person not guilty, then they are no longer considered to be guilty.

And yes, a court can, and no doubt has, ruled a guilty person to be not guilty. But don't you feel, morally, that it is better to release a guilty person than to imprison an innocent person?

Answer 2

Assuming you mean "accused" and not "convicted", the answer is to your question is yes with a but. It might be semantics, but there is a big difference between "innocent" and "not guilty". Guilty, in legal terms, means there is enough evidence to convict beyond all reasonable doubt. Being found not guilty does not necessarily mean you didn't commit the crime in question, it simply means there wasn't enough evidence to convict. Innocent means you didn't do it, not guilty means there wasn't enough evidence to prove that you did.

Answer 3

Yes. If you are found innocent it means you are innocent. Is that hard to understand?

Why not just execute everyone accused of crimes? And people who look at you funny? And the poor - seeing as crime is more prevalent amongst them. That way all the nasty guilty people are dead and you reign, glorious civilized man, supreme atop your mountain of skulls.