The United States government can indict you on something, and now you've got to prove your innocence. And that's not the Constitution of the United States.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Some may remember, if you have good memories, that there used to be a concept in Anglo-American law called a presumption of innocence, innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Now that's so deep in history that there's no point even bringing it up, but it did once exist.
People are entitled to the presumption of innocence.
To have the truth in your possession you can be found guilty, sentenced to death.
We all have the problem of what do you do with the not-guilty-yet in free and democratic societies where you have the presumption of innocence. It's a very difficult problem.
I didn't do what they said I did. I may have done enough so that I don't know if I can prove my innocence.
You do not have to incriminate yourself. But once you assert your innocence, and once you say you didn't do anything wrong, you can't then use the Fifth Amendment to say, 'I'm not answering questions.'
While you're finding evidence of innocence, you also find evidence that points to other people.
There is nothing new in the realization that the Constitution sometimes insulates the criminality of a few in order to protect the privacy of us all.
While the government can tell you that I am an innocent man, the government's letter cannot give me back my good name or my reputation.
An important and fundamental premise of the American judicial system is the presumption of innocence, that is until proven guilty.