Today, it’s a rush to judgment; with Bill Clinton, it was not
I am not writing here to declare guilt or innocence. Of that I only have an opinion, and we all know about opinions. In cases of recent sexualassault allegations, the accused is automatically presumed to be guilty in the eyes of the media and the public in general. I see nothing of presumption of innocence in the news. Let’s take Judge Roy Moore, for example. If he murdered someone or robbed a bank, at least he would be tried in a court of law. In this case, the media is the judge, the public, the jury with a guilty verdict before the trial begins. In regard to the recent accusations of sexual assault made against numerous politicians and Hollywoods, whatever happened to presumption of innocence? If those accused cannot provide absolute definitive proof, they are unquestionably presumed guilty. Let’s back up 20 years and look at an unnamed high-ranking politician from Arkansas. In this case it was incumbent on the accuser to provide proof of truth. Now it’s a complete 180 from those times. The accused has to respond to the accusation even when no proof is offered, only words. If the accused cannot provide definitive proof, they are presumed guilty. We need to meet someplace between 20 years ago and now.