You're misquoting. It is "presumed innocent". Most criminal defendants are guilty of the crime for which they are charged.
I think it can be really hard on lawyers at times. Society really frowns upon a criminal defense attorney's representation of a rapist, and of course their opinion isn't changed when the defendant is found factually innocent at trial.
The USA has a legal system wherein even a guilty murderer can walk free if the police used unconstitutional means to gather the evidence against them. This system was put in place by judges (not by legislators) simply because they were sick of police and prosecutors using these unethical methods to convict, and then there was no investigation or misconduct charges against them.
Majority of convictions are plea deals, because trial penalty is just too large. And it is pretty much impossible to overturn existing convicion on anything but technical process mistake - no matter how convincing new evidence of innocense is.
While guilty murderer can walk, courts are also super eager to accept shoddy "scientific" evidence. And being defense layer is also worst for your career the being prosecutor. So, I am not sure it is as rosy as you make it sound.
I think it can be really hard on lawyers at times. Society really frowns upon a criminal defense attorney's representation of a rapist, and of course their opinion isn't changed when the defendant is found factually innocent at trial.
The USA has a legal system wherein even a guilty murderer can walk free if the police used unconstitutional means to gather the evidence against them. This system was put in place by judges (not by legislators) simply because they were sick of police and prosecutors using these unethical methods to convict, and then there was no investigation or misconduct charges against them.