Abstract

An acquittal or insufficiency of evidence does not predicate innocence

Article

The court's direction in a criminal trial that an insufficiency of evidence which allows a reasonable doubt to remaindoes not mean that such a finding implies innocence.  It is no more than a formula  which sometimes allows the guilty to go free as the price of tryiing to ensure that an innocent person is not convicted of and punished for an offence.

Those who use the proposition as a grondforinferring innocence are grosslymisrepresenting the principle and its application.  They are also guiltyof gross illogic which is so bad that its sincerity and honesty must bein the most serious doubt.