Originally Posted by FORTBROWNFAN
Originally Posted by Hamfist
[quote=FrankZ]And yet Watson is innocent until proven otherwise.

Crazy, but that is how it actually works.
Originally Posted by FrankZ
No, it’s not. The grand jury decides if there is enough evidence to bring a case to court. That is in no way a definition of innocent.

That's very true, in fact I am pretty sure a court/jury never finds anyone innocent, they find them guilty or not guilty. Not guilty is not the same as innocent. Innocent is we know he didn't do it, not guilty means the prosecution did not prove beyond a reasonable that he did it. It may be semantics, but definitely a different determination.
By the simple fact that when charged with a crime your are either not guilty or guilty. Not guilty and innocent are not the same for sure, and in the case of Watson, at this point in time is innocent. Why? two things, innocent until proven guilty and there was never charged with anything, only accused. Accusations not a criminal charge make. 2 grand juries decline to indict Watson on a criminal charge, yet people still want to play the "oh hes not innocent blah bblah" I can't believe how much this pandering has gone on. Surely there has to be something else to talk about. Noone on this board, myself included have ANY CLUE what either side knows or does. The only thing that is absolute is he has 22 civil cases to respond to and ZERO criminal charges to answer for. The moral police can keep that rhetoric, but until theres any resolution either way its just trolling