Do you really want us to start judging everyone guilty until they prove themselves innocent? Because that's what you're saying. I don't know about you, but I would hope that here on DU, the person has to be proven guilty by their accusers first, with solid facts, not have to prove themselves innocent to anyone who accuses.

Because in the end, there is no way to prove one's innocence to someone is intent on believing you are guilty. You can show them pictures and video that you weren't at the scene of the crime and they'll still say, "You sent someone to do it for you." If you want to believe this connection is there, you will. But don't try and convince me or anyone else that the connection exists simply because there is no proof that it doesn't exists. It is up to the accuser to prove it true, not up to the accused to prove it false. And a good thing, too. If you were accused of this...how would you feel about someone insisting that no proof doesn't excuse you of the crime?