by Kevin Kelton
This past few weeks, I heard the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" bandied about quite a bit. A lot of people mistakenly think that means you/we aren't allowed to believe someone is guilty of a crime before they are tried and convicted. That's not correct. Unless we are on that person's jury, we may think and believe anything we want about a public figure, including weighing any evidence available to us and coming to a conclusion of the person being guilty. The presuption of innocence is a legal construct of our justice system that applies to criminal trials, not to what you and I choose to think or say in our everyday lives. Even in a court of law, the rule is not absolute; prosecutors are allowed to believe in the defendant’s guilt and to advocate publicly about it. Only a judge and jury are required to suspend those beliefs and only during the course of the criminal trial.
I will always think that OJ Simpson, George Zimmerman and Kyle Rittenhouse were murderers regardless of the outcome of their trials. I guess there are people who will always believe Hillary Clinton was guilty of some criminal act as well. That's their prerogative.
This April 2024 article by James Caldwell elaborates on these points and other common misconceptions about the rights enumerated in U.S. Constitution. Caldwell writes:
"First, it should be pointed out that if you did it, you’re guilty, no matter what. So you’re not innocent unless you’re truly innocent. However, our system presumes innocence, which means that legally speaking, even the obviously guilty are treated as though they are innocent, until they are proven otherwise. The concept of the presumption of innocence is one of the most basic in our system of justice. However, in so many words, it is not codified in the text of the Constitution. This basic right comes to us, like many things, from English jurisprudence, and has been a part of that system for so long, that it is considered common law. The concept is embodied in several provisions of the Constitution, however, such as the right to remain silent and the right to a jury."
And once someone is convicted of a crime, even if you believe in your heart and soul they were unjustly accused, they are still convicted felons in the eyes of the law, whether you like it or not. Just because they are appealing the verdict doesn't change that until the appeal is ruled on and reversed.
So, in the coming months, when Donald Trump apologists try to convince you that their candidate is not a convicted felon or that his status as a felon shouldn’t be considered against him in the election, don’t buy it. A criminal conviction is a fact, not a subjective opinion. Everyone is free to assess the candidates as they wish. But one of the major party candidates is a convicted felon thirty-four times over and the other is not.
You may listen to more of author Kevin Kelton’s political views and opinions on The More Perfect Union Podcast: Real debate without the hate!