I've heard this saying before but don't know if it's actually true in the eyes of the law.

From your question it sounds like someone is upset that they were arrested without any proof. Unfortunately if a person calls the police and reports a crime, the police officer has little choice but to make an arrest and allow the accused his/her day in court. There have been cases were the police acted over jealously and should not have made the arrest but, instead they should of referred the case to the D.A. for further consideration by a grand jury. The good thing is that most people condemn the use of excessive force, police brutality, false arrest and you can sue if you feel your rights were violated.

“..Innocent until proven guilty.." The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution reads, in part, "No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law ..."

What this means, in plain terms, is that constitutionally you cannot be executed, imprisoned, or fined without the proper course of justice taking place. Due process, itself, is not defined in the constitution, but is universally recognized as meaning what we term as "a fair trial."

Presumption of innocence is a legal right that we all are granted. It states that no person shall be considered guilty until finally convicted by a court. The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which has to convince the jury that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In principle, the defense does not have to 'prove' anything. However, the defense may present evidence tending to show that there is a doubt as to the guilt of the accused.

   As a former police officer, I DID NOT arrest someone just because a crime was committed, because by doing so the court system would become completely clogged in a matter of weeks.

   I always weighed the three (3) following factors:

(1) The severity of the offense

(2) The recidivism rate of the offender by weighing the offender's "past record"

(3) The attitude of the offender

NOTE: By utilizing the above method, offender's are provided "a chance to learn from their mistakes".

Loyde P. "Snake" Arender
Monroe, Louisiana

It is as is said "in the eye of the beholder." Depending upon the circumstances a "not guilty" verdict could mean that there wasn't enough evidence to convict the person on trial. There's a pretty famous trial that supports that premise. What it comes down to is what people choose to believe. Was the person innocent or did they just "get away with it."

"We often forget that a person is innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt; not the other way around."

Dan

New York Immigration Lawyer Marina Shepelsky, located in Brooklyn, assists clients from the New York metro area and across the United States in all immigration and naturalization matters

http://www.e-us-visa.com

hi i have a question tho and might be in the wrong area. if so plz direct me, i new. i  see this and wonder, i have a situation that somone live withme since they been in kindergarden( yes i had temp cusody) and now she 17 and b/c i have rules and dont let her do what ever and she been in trouble at school and hangoing with the wrong crowd, we had a big arguement, when we went out to eat.

so she she decides to runaway from the restruant, and i got the police involved and did a miss perosn thru the hotline, b/c i was worried about her in a area we dont live when she ran and anway i track her down and when i went to police to get her and then i found her late at nighth hanging in the streets well told then there she is.

well they got out and said you have to come with your aunt and then she goes i kill myself first and then later she said i absued her. so the police man said she allegating, i said well yes that what alot teeen doing amymopre when they want there way..
so he said he have to goto hsopital and i said fine strip her down and you wont find a mark.  so anyway they didnt find makrs but her allegations they still quest , so now im under investigation and i scared b/c i have 2 of my kids and i dont want them taken away b/c of her lies, they 13-16.  so i kinda in the dark and trying to find legal help.

i dont underrstand   these people yes there alot abuse cases out there buut hey it usualy start at early age and not just at the age of 17 and  wouldnt a perosn that abuse why would they even call the cops and then have the cops go out  there if knowing knows she going to say absue that perosn would be scared, that why i said i dont have nothing to hide take her, but now i let her go it doing more harm.

do they normal aressted ya, it been sept20 and it nov. i scared still, they never got back with me.  sorry if im in the wrong place, it just i have 2 kids at stake, i have a grown 25 yr on his own now and for somoen  to do this b/c she want her freedom to drink and gothic and other things i dont approve up. all i wanted to do get her to finsh school go to college and make a life for her self. thanks, ang

In Georgia, social services or Department of Family and Children Services would be notified and a 30 day investigation would take place.  An investigator would talk to you and all of the children in the home.  They would talk to doctors, family members, friends, etc.  After weighing all the information, they would then make a determination as to whether or not any maltreatment occurred.  They would then have the option of holding the case open and working with your family by offering services such as counseling.   They may put the niece and/or the other children in foster care if they determine that any abuse or neglect occurred.  If there was significant abuse, then they would make a recommedation to law enforcement to initiate criminal charges.  If things are the way you explained then they would try to get your niece placed safely in your home.  You might contact the juvenile justice authorities.  They have the power to arrest minors for being unruly.  At least in a juvenile detention center she would be better off than on the streets.  Good luck to you and God bless.