"guilty" in a legal sense means that a jury has found a person responsible for a crime beyond reasonable doubt. Criminal court asks if there is enough evidence to prove a person's guilt. Theoretically a person can actually commit a crime but there may be no evidence linking him to that crime. So the person is found "not guilty" by a jury but in actuality, actually committed the crime. The person is not innocent but was found "not guilty" under the rules of the court. BTW...all this talk of innocent until proven guilty applies to a court of law. People can draw whatever conclusions they want. It is a good idea to see all of the evidence before "convicting" someone although if you believe the police's DNA evidence (which I do) it's pretty tough not to believe this guy's guilt.
I hope the judicial system gets this one right (convict if he's the guy, let him go if not). It's good that they caught up to him this easily. The stuff that's been written about the DNA evidence hasn't sounded completely clear. I'm sure we'll know more in the next 24 hours if he's the one. I hope the killer's off the streets but still want this guy to get treated fairly if he's innocent. You just pray for the victims' families to have closure.
