I hear what you are saying.
But, in the American court system, unfortunately, it's not really about who is truly guilty or innocent. It's about who can make the stronger and more persuasive case. If the jury is educated and not emotionally swayed, and truly interested in what the facts are, there's a better chance that a truer verdict will be reached. If they are not better educated and only more interested in who is more emotionally appealing then, whichever side tugs harder on their little heartstrings will get their vote.
The truth is, the Federal government has already found a heck of a lot of dirt on these people, and these people, no matter how many times they have been very nicely asked, have not been able to provide a scrap of proof that what they are doing is on the up and up.
So, in a sense, this innocent until proven guilty stuff is really kind of moot. There are 81 plus 39 pages proving he's guilty. Let's see if he can come up with some good excuses or some concrete proof of this "shareholder value" he's been building. I hope they pick a smart jury that has LOTS of common sense.
