> we should really start with a presumption of innocence

I totally agree, but I think most people are presuming innocence, i.e. that he REFUSED to be party to match-fixing. The surprise defeat (IF it was a result of taking a dive) clearly could have been carried out regardless of his wishes - they're out on the field, he's not.

The national news here (Ireland) pointed out that Woolmer was a large man and the room showed no evidence of disturbance or forced entry, nor signs of any struggle. If you're strangled you thrash about so things get scattered and knocked over, which makes one wonder just how many men it took to subdue him to such an extent? That it was strangulation and not heart failure as suggested by the earlier news was apparently common knowledge among Jamaican journos & insiders. Why'd it take so long to get out? I heard this story two(?) days ago - unsubstantiated of course.

Anyway the world's sympathy is with him, and it seems far more likely that he was a victim rather than a perpetrator of anything dishonourable. R.I.P.