General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Does anyone dispute the fact that the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous? [View all]Ms. Toad
(38,495 posts)"Not guilty" says nothing at all about the truth of the allegation - not even that the jury doesn't believe the allegations. To find "not guilty," every single juror can still believe the accused is actually guilty of the crime - and still return a verdict of not guilty if a single juror believes that a reasonable person could reach a different conclusion based on the evidence presented. (That is what beyond a reasonable doubt means.)
"Innocent" means that after a court has found someone guilty and that person has served time, the conviction has been reversed. As a step toward seeking compensation from the state, a court must generally determine 50+% that the allegations against that particular person were false.
In both cases, the allegations could actually be either true or false. But in the case of a "not guilty" verdict, there is no assessment at all about innocence (or the truth of the allegations). Only an assessment by the jury that a reasonable person could conclude that either the crime wasn't committed - or that it was committed by someone else.
In the case of a verdict of innocent (declaration of innocence), there is a decision by the court that the allegations were false.
When you assert that, "Round numbers, 1 out of 4 of those cases resulted in a NOT GUILTY or INNOCENT verdict" contradicts the claim of ,"'.6%' false allegation rate," you are equating the two - "not guilty" and "innocent." Legally, and in terms of what they mean about the truth of an allegation," they are extremely different.
(And, frankly, even if you hadn't inserted "innocent" into your statement, the way you are using the numbers makes it clear you are equating "not guilty" with "innocent" or "false allegation." They aren't the same - and it isn't just semantics. Ask anyone who has been released via the Innocence project, and who has been denied compensation for false imprisonment because the reversal of their conviction is not sufficient to establish their innocence.)