I can't understand how some peple are able to make assertions regarding convicted persons such as Harris being actually innocent unless they were in court during the trial itself or had an inside knowledge of the case. The jury heard the whole trial and, if there wasn't a case to answer, the judge would have directed them accordingly. You can't make a proper judgement based on media sound bites and court reports on TV.

When accused persons are found not guilty, it's not acceptable to slander them publicly or dispute their innocence in the media or in public forums. So why is it OK to defend convicted criminals and bad mouth prosecution witnesses as one particular poster has done in this instance?