Reasonable doubt is the measure used to prove someone guilty in a US court of law. The person is judged on just the one act.
It seems to me that the opposite--nobody is guilty until proven not to be innocent--would not stand up to the need to punish or incarcerate those who would be a danger to us. In fact, the opposite would occur since innocence (the absence of a certain behavior) would bring in many more factors that would confuse or obliterate the issue.
Innocent means you are innocent of a crime.. That is you did not commit it. A court (jury/judge) will not find someone "innocent". They can't say that you did not commit a crime, they can only decide for "not guilty" if the evidence presented is enough that you are believed to have committed a crime (guilty) or not (not guilty).
The antonym for innocent is guilty.
The antonym of innocent is guilty.
The statement is based on the idea that everybody is guilty of something. Thus while a person may be a victim of a crime or transgression, they are not entirely innocent themselves, and so cannot be an "innocent victim".
Innocent or Not Guilty
Simply because there is no obvious difference between innocents and guilty. You can have a surly, ugly brute, with a long criminal record who is innocent - at least of that particular crime. Or you can have someone looking like a perfectly trustworthy and honest citizen who've done the most horrible things. You just can't tell. Innocent vs guilty has to be settled by something ELSE. Evidence, witness statements etc. And these can sometimes be wrong, or interpreted wrong.
Guilty!!!!
Innocent.
Innocent or acquitted.
guilty
Guilty.
A jury or court finds that the accused is not guilty, in reality the accused may not innocent.