TexasCHLforum.com

I agree that there should be a penalty for a DA who falsely accuses and prosecutes an innocent citizen. Legal fees are prohibitively expensive. This just might restrain DAs from frifoulous prosecutions.

Maybe then citizens would not have to defend themselves in court after defending themselves in life.

Not guilty as a verdict means that the prosecution did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused as charged. Innocent, in othe words. The thought here is that until the verdict, or a confession is given, the accused is innocent. Guilt cannot be asigned until a verdict is rendered. Hence, not guilty and innocent should be synonymous.

This has never been actually true in practice, unfortunately. I have been on several criminal juries, and each time I have been disturbed by the actual process by which an accused is tried.

The system is not perfect, it may even be broke, but it is so much better than the other systems out there in the world. But truly, I am terrified of ever having to be under our system' s authority as an accused.

Not guilty is the same as innocent of the charge.
Innocent until proven guilty does not one thing for the person falsely accused, especially when the DA plays to the media about the charges. The Travis County DA had obvious political motivations for the indictment and tried to make a case for his prosecution in the media.

Both of these (politically motivated indictments and using the media to influence the people,) should be chargeable offenses. At the very least, any public official who uses his office to injure someone for political reasons should be removed from office. If these type of acts are allowed to stand, to remain without remedy, then there is no longer a possibility of justice for anyone.