Replies

Marking a spot in this thread, I've read the whole thing, and I want to give kudos to both RK and CO for their fairly objective and fair debate, in the absence of very much information, it's been a very interesting debate to read.

I too have seen FR (any message board really) taken for a ride where people take up a cause they really don't know enough about and end up burned. I've seen threads like this bring about good activism too, but I'm wary. I'm always a little suspicious and reluctant to meddle when the FR detective league thinks they have the whole thing figured out after hearing very little.

Yes, innocence should be assumed in court, but advocacy requires full disclosure of the facts. We don't yet have that, only a heads up. We're merely curious outsiders, who are each bringing our biases and politics and tendency to make assumptions to the thread. We don't ~know~ anything.

That said, there is a bit of confusion as to when we have the right of assumption of innocence. CPS, in investigating allegations of abuse has a duty to investigate. As an investigative and enforcement branch of the government, they have no duty to assume innocence, only a duty to uphold the law. Your right to be assumed innocent does not protect you from investigation or prosecution, only from being convicted without due process. The prosecutor does not have the role of assuming your innocence, a court does. That's the process. There's no indication here that CPS is acting outside the law, but there is indication the family is. You cannot obstruct that process on claims of a right to not be investigated.