• r1veRRR@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Innocence is VERY SPECIFICALLY NOT WHAT COURTS declare. They only ever declare that there wasn’t enough evidence presented to proof guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

      • r1veRRR@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Considered innocent, by the state organs. Considered innocent, in how the state treats them. NOT EVER AT ALL PROVEN innocent by the courts.

        Courts are not and have never been concerned about proving innocence. All they care about is guilty or not guilty. Not guilty could mean innocent, but again, the courts don’t care about that.

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      The standard is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. If someone is declared “not guilty”, defacto they should be considered innocent.

      • r1veRRR@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Considered innocent, by the state organs. Considered innocent, in how the state treats them. NOT EVER AT ALL PROVEN innocent by the courts.

        Courts are not and have never been concerned about proving innocence. All they care about is guilty or not guilty. Not guilty could mean innocent, but again, the courts don’t care about that.

        • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          What I’m saying is that the basic social contract used to be that you would be considered innocent until proven guilty by your peers. If we abandon we mess with the foundations of society at our own peril.