I don't forget that. I just know that the presumption of innocence applies to a courtroom, not a person's opinion. Nothing wrong with forming an opinion before someone is actually convicted (unless you're sitting on a jury). And as we saw with OJ, the system doesn't always get it right.
I agree with the smoke/fire thing. Things usually are as they appear to be; the simplest explanation is typically the best, etc. But not always.
People's opinions and perceptions greatly impact whether we think someone is guilty or innocent. Whether wrong or right, juries are made up of regular people, people who, like it or not, have opinions. Jurors are strictly instructed to keep an open mind and not form an opinion or discuss the case until all evidence, arguments, and instructions are presented. Not everyone follows those instructions even when they say or even believe they have. Human nature prevails.
As for smoke and fire, more smoke often means a bigger fire. How many fires does the average person face in their lifetime? Some folks are on the hot seat more than others. It is only natural to wonder why they are.
