# People exonerated by trial, over public opinion **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 22, 2016, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549 "2016-09-22T00:07:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![eclectic\_wench](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ac91a4/32.png) [@eclectic\_wench](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eclectic_wench)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/21 "2016-09-22T16:11:40Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > IANAL, but I have trouble with this distinction. > > How do you explain away, “Innocent until proven guilty.” ? It’s not ‘innocent until proven guilty’. It’s ‘\*presumed \*innocent until proven guilty’. And it doesn’t mean that the ordinary Joe on the street is obligated to believe that OJ was innocent. It means that _the legal system_ has to presume that the accused is innocent until/unless proven guilty. A juror, for example, can personally believe that the accused is guilty as hell - but acting as a part of the legal system, that same juror can vote ‘not guilty’ because he or she doesn’t believe the case was proved beyond a reasonable doubt, so the accused has to be presumed innocent for legal purposes. In Scotland they actually have three possible verdicts: ‘guilty’, ‘innocent’ and ‘not proven’. ‘Not proven’ is like a not guilty verdict - it means the prosecution didn’t prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and the accused goes free. ‘Innocent’ means that the accused has been proven to be innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. ---
**Author:** ![Yarster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/7c8e57/32.png) [@Yarster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yarster)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/22 "2016-09-22T16:31:59Z")
I can’t believe no one brought up the McMartin Preschool case yet: [McMartin preschool trial - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial) Also, let’s not forget actor Robert Blake and the murder of Bonnie Lee Bakley: [Bonny Lee Bakley - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonnie_Lee_Bakley) ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/23 "2016-09-22T16:38:41Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > IANAL, but I have trouble with this distinction. > > How do you explain away, “Innocent until proven guilty.” ? It means that the prosecution has to prove the Accused’s guilt, he does not have to prove his innocence. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/24 "2016-09-22T16:45:31Z")
I don’t agree about George Zimmerman - there were many people who thought he was innocent and justified, and also many who thought he was legally innocent though unjustified. Especially after the facts began emerging. OJ is a special case as regards the OP. The public at large generally thought he was guilty. But the segment of the public which was of the same ethnicity as the jury overwhelmingly thought he was innocent. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/25 "2016-09-22T17:34:57Z")
Although interviews with the jurors seem to suggest they were unimpressed by the prosecution’s cases as opposed to swayed by the ethnocentric concerns. And thats fair, since from what I recall, the prosecution’s case had huge holes in it. They did a lousy job. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/26 "2016-09-22T17:42:51Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Although interviews with the jurors seem to suggest they were unimpressed by the prosecution’s cases as opposed to swayed by the ethnocentric concerns. No big surprise there, it’s not like they were going to say “we thought the evidence overwhelmingly showed he was guilty but decided to acquit him anyway because he was a black guy who killed a white woman”. More importantly, and beyond whatever they would have said, very few people _think_ they’re being influenced by anything other than the evidence, and people generally believe they’re being guided by a dispassionate assessment of the evidence. But the polls showed pretty clearly that there was a very big split by race as to belief in OJ’s guilt. And the point that’s relevant to this thread is that if you had taken a randomly selected group of people with the same ethnic composition as that jury, the “not guilty” position would have been the majority. So it’s not really correct to say that OJ was “exonerated by trial, over public opinion”. ---
**Author:** ![jbaker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jbaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jbaker)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/27 "2016-09-22T18:01:31Z")
By “exonerated” does the OP mean that a defendant, who was widely considered guilty by the public, was found not guilty? There must be thousands of such cases. Or does the OP mean that the trial actually reversed public opinion, and the defendant not only was found not guilty, but also was exonerated in the view of the public? There must be a few such cases, but none immediately come to mind. ---
**Author:** ![Morbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/morbo/32/389_2.png) [@Morbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morbo)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/28 "2016-09-22T18:03:56Z")
Well there was the murder of [Chandra Levy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandra_Levy), who was having an affair with congressman Gary Condit. Condit was cleared fairly early on in the investigation, but did not get reelected as a result of the media focus. Of course, the media kinda had other things to report on a few months later in 2001. ---
**Author:** ![Miss\_Mapp](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miss_mapp/32/369_2.png) [@Miss\_Mapp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miss_Mapp)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/29 "2016-09-22T18:04:11Z")
> [@Bill\_Door](#): > > Lizzie Borden The books I’ve read on the subject say that a great deal of public opinion was pro-Lizzie before and during her trial. It was only after her acquittal–pretty soon afterwards–that people began to reconsider the case. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/30 "2016-09-22T19:09:56Z")
Clay Shaw? (I know, most people outside New Orleans never heard of the case, and even in New Orleans, many people thought Jim Garrison was nuts.) ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/31 "2016-09-22T19:17:05Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > But yes, there’s a taste of “if he’s accused he must be guilty” in what I read when people say that someone found “not guilty” is not “innocent”. I’ve never felt that way… the idea is rather that “legally not guilty” does not correspond 100% with “innocent of committing the crime”. Stating that someone is not guilty, yet not necessarily innocent is pointing out the difference between the legal concepts of guilty/not-guilty and the more conventional concept of guilt vs. innocence. Someone can be guilty as hell in the latter sense, yet found not-guilty in a court of law due to various reasons, including things like mishandled evidence or improper police procedure. That’s the kind of thing that the statement is trying to point out, rather than trying to imply that someone found not guilty is really guilty due to their accusation. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/32 "2016-09-22T19:22:17Z")
> [@Yarster](#): > > I can’t believe no one brought up the McMartin Preschool case yet: [McMartin preschool trial - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial) > > Also, let’s not forget actor Robert Blake and the murder of Bonnie Lee Bakley: [Bonny Lee Bakley - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonnie_Lee_Bakley) The McMartin preschool case was a case on innocent people genuinely, needlessly persecuted and ruined by a justice system caught up in the Satanic Panic of the 1980s. Read about some of the wild accusations made, in particular against Ray Buckey by children who attended the school before Buckey was even hired there. One of the unluckiest guys on the planet. Spent 5 years in prison just waiting for his trial, denied bail. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/33 "2016-09-23T06:29:40Z")
Interesting bit of news in the Globe and Mail newspaper… > [@](#): > > A new study by the MacDonald-Laurier Institute offers valuable insight into why these contradictory phenomena are occurring in Canada’s largest province. The study, which evaluates and grades the criminal justice of every province and territory, suggests that one big part of the problem is that police in Ontario are laying too many charges that lead nowhere. > > In Ontario, 43 per cent of charges laid are ultimately stayed or withdrawn. Of those that do go to trial, the conviction rate is just 55 per cent. Ontario has by far the lowest conviction rate in the country, and the highest number, again by far, of cases that are dropped. > > In Quebec, where police must get the approval of a Crown prosecutor before laying charges, a mere 8.6 per cent of charges are stayed or withdrawn, and the conviction rate is 75 per cent. In British Columbia, where the Crown similarly has to approve charges, only 29 per cent of charges are dropped and the conviction rate is 70 per cent. So around half to a quarter of people charged are found not guilty or charges are dropped. Kinda puts a lie to the idea “if they are charged, they must be guilty” idea. * * * The McMartin case, and similar, shows an interesting facet of life - that children have no idea about sex drives and sexual acts unless they’ve been molested - so when obviously cued to describe bad behaviour, to please the interrogators, they make up the most weird and horrible things they can imagine - usually involving killing babies, cannibalism, and other interesting stuff. there were a number such cases about that time where with proper leading, children alleged bizarre ritualistic acts. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/34 "2016-09-23T13:37:30Z")
> [@Yarster](#): > > I can’t believe no one brought up the McMartin Preschool case yet: [McMartin preschool trial - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial) Also Margaret Kelly Michaels and the [Wee Care Nursery School](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wee_Care_Nursery_School_abuse_trial). The second American witch hunt. Suddenly there was a nation wide ring of Satanists doing unspeakable things. Odd the FBI found no evidence of this. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549/35 "2016-09-23T17:29:43Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > Also Margaret Kelly Michaels and the [Wee Care Nursery School](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wee_Care_Nursery_School_abuse_trial). The second American witch hunt. Suddenly there was a nation wide ring of Satanists doing unspeakable things. Odd the FBI found no evidence of this. Well, in the 80’s apparently every evil teen person was a Satanist - proven by the fact they enjoyed playing dungeons and dragons. By 2000, thanks to events like Columbine, it was goths. Now to piss of society and get back at your parents you can join ISIS instead. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/people-exonerated-by-trial-over-public-opinion/766549.md?page=1)