Hacker News Reader

Comment by kaffeinecoma | Hacker News Reader

  > One had a criminal history that included three assault charges

I really dislike when "charges" are used this way to defame character. Were the charges dismissed? Was the person found innocent during a trial?

View on HN

Not found innocent. All the jury said is that the state did not prove its claims to their liking.

Do juries ever "find innocent" then? My understanding is that innocence is presumed until guilt proven, in which case a jury simply not finding them guilty is sufficient to say they're (legally) innocent.

That's why the opposite of "guilty" at trial is "not guilty". Someone who is not guilty is not necessarily innocent, even of the charged crime, but there's not enough evidence there to find guilt.

Interestingly, in Scotland (but not the rest of the UK) there's still the third choice of 'Not proven' which indicates that there is not enough evidence (or a problem with the evidence) to prove guilt, whereas acquittal is seen to be a finding of innocence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com