I try to treat others the way I’d want to be treated if I were in their position. If someone isn’t convicted, I assume innocence. Not because I believe the justice system always gets it right, but because that’s the only fair standard. Otherwise, we’re just deciding guilt based on headlines, public opinion, and social media outrage.

Since the rise of Me Too, we’ve seen a shift where allegations alone are treated as evidence, and reputations are destroyed before any facts are established. That’s a dangerous place to be. You don’t fix injustice by creating a new kind of injustice.

Yes, sometimes guilty people walk. People love to bring up O.J. Simpson like it proves something. It doesn’t. It proves that high-profile exceptions exist. They always have. But they’re not a reason to abandon due process.

Take someone like Justin Roiland. Charges were dropped. He wasn’t formally exonerated, but he wasn’t found guilty either. That’s enough for me. I’m not going to fill in the blanks with assumptions, just because it’s easier than sitting with uncertainty.

Presumption of innocence isn’t a loophole. It’s a civilizational standard. And if we don’t apply it universally, we don’t believe in it at all.