So every District Attorney thinks every person he prosecutes is innocent until a judge or jury tells him different?????
Following your logic; that would also mean that Cops arrested people they thought were innocent every time they made an arrest, right?
First, the Presumption of Innocence is as old as Western history, as well as Common Law. It underpins the adversarial legal system in this country. It is intrinsic to the Reasonable Doubt standard in jurisprudence. It has been held to be Constitutionally mandated since 1895. In short, it is a principle as fundamental to the nature of this nation as the Right to Bear Arms.
Second, I would think that people (including me) who are instinctively mistrustful of media would demonstrate a degree of circumspection when basing moral judgements on media reports, especially ones that have already been shown to be conflicting.
Third, I would hope that people interested in right, justice, and due process would be naturally inclined to grant the benefit of the doubt to anyone who is accused of a crime,
let alone someone who has
not yet even been accused.
Fourth, governmental prosecutors, including district attorneys, do not, at least in theory, prosecute people they assume to be innocent or guilty; there is no assumption made (yet there remains the
presumption of innocence). What they do is execute the legal path that they and/or their employers determine is proper according to the laws of their jurisdiction, seeking
justice, not
conviction. It is, undeniably, the case that government prosecutors, particularly those who are elected, are incentivized to favor conviction over justice. All the more reason that rational and justice-minded people should err on the side of presuming innocence.
Fifth, police officers do not, at least in theory, arrest people they have determined to be guilty. Rather, they arrest people who have met statutorily-defined standards for detention and incarceration, which make no assumption of guilt or innocence (yet there remains the
presumption of innocence), but instead determine reasonable allowances for the maintenance of public safety
in pursuit of justice. It is, undeniably, the case that police officers are often incentivized to arrest those who have not, by reasonable and objective judgement, met those statutorily-defined standards. All the more reason that rational and justice-minded people should err on the side of presuming innocence.
Finally, while we, as human creatures, are prone to make judgements based upon limited evidence, and often do so properly, effectively, and usefully, we must, as rational, objective people, strive always to withhold hasty, unsubstantiated judgement upon our fellow people,
particularly when it comes to their lives, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. A dead man deserves no less.
