"Gary" wrote in message
news:Hj7_d.705670$8l.82730@pd7tw1no...
Your right it does sound bloodthirsty and maybe I should take another
look
at what I had written after I cool down a little.
If they are innocent then I am glad that the judge ruled in their favor.

Now the judge didn't say they where innocent but rather the prosecution
was unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they were guilty.

The innocence of the accused was not a question before the court.
Only allegations as to their guilt, and it is only to these allegations
that the court was addressed.

And being unable to render a judgement of guilty, the judge doesn't
need to speak to the innocence of the accused. They were always
presumed innocent, and absent a verdict of guilty, the presumption
remains.