Re: "He was found not guilty, therefore he is innocent"
No that's not what "not guilty" means. It means what it says - there isn't sufficient evidence to find someone guilty. They could be innocent, or they're actually guilty but there's not sufficient proof.
Our legal system presumes innocence. Unless a person is found guilty of a crime then, legally, they are innocent and should be treated as such. If a person is found not guilty, they are legally innocent of that crime full stop*.
I find it incredibly disturbing the amount that a person can be punished for a crime he has not been convicted of now in this country. This case is yet another example, and it is a completely draconian punishment, with few restrictions. I really hope it gets quashed: Whether this guy did anything wrong is irrelevant, unless he is found guilty of a crime by a jury of his peers, he should not be punished for that crime. His life has been destroyed by this. He can not work in his field with this order in place, or in any office environment. At best, he may be able to work as a labourer, some unskilled job. He has no right to privacy, would be unable to have a relationship, has none of the basic freedoms we have a right to. In short, he is practically an unperson just for having "abnormal" sexual fantasies.
*Yes, I know that he could be retried, given the seriousness of these charges. However, this is only if sufficient new evidence comes up AND an appeals court overturns the original verdict. Until then, he is legally innocent of the crimes he was charged with.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
