Ed Seedhouse wrote in message . ..
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:32:08 GMT, "PaoloTCS"
wrote:

He was found **Not Guilty**. He may be innocent, but what the jury found
was that Dr. Sherzer was not guilty.

Well isn't the theory supposed to be that one is innnocent until
proven guilty? If so then if he wasn't proven guilty he must be
considered innocent before the law.

I think that "innocent until proven guilty" is not so much a
theory, as it is a well-intentioned cliche. After all, "Not guilty
until proven guilty" doesn't have much of a ring to it, and sounds
rather self-evident, to boot.