Michael 345

New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl
Valued Senior Member
It matters not the be crime

It is reasonably spectacular

Trial is held and is almost the only news being run

Guilty seems to be the only possible outcome all things being equal (not sure that phase applies here but will go with it)

Jury retires, jury returns, judge is apprised of verdict

What say you?

We find the defendant not....
(Let's pause here. The script is about to change and the reporters going berserk trying to be the first to report)

The slip of paper given to the judge read
We find the defendant guilty....

The forman reads out
We find the defendant not innocent.....

Is not innocent the same as guilty?

In the rush to be the first to report not guilty (probably a not guilty phase totally unexpected - a not innocent phase - not seen even with Hubble

Thoughts please

In Scotland you can get a Not Proven verdict, which doesn't mean you're cleared as innocent, but nor are you proven guilty. It means that they think you probably are guilty but that the prosecution failed to prove it beyond the required reasonable doubt.

However, I believe they were going to abolish this and go with the standard system of guilty/not guilty. Not sure if they have done so, or still intending to.

Bear in mind, these verdicts aren't necessarily the truth, only what a jury conclude, based on the evidence presented.

Personally I would say that if you are found "not innocent" then there is at least some guilt implied, but maybe not as much as with a full-on guilty verdict. That's if you're even trying to make a distinction.
Last edited: