Guilty Until Proven Innocent?

A few days ago I sent off one of my occasional Letters to the Editor of the Raleigh (NC) News & Observer. I had been following the story of a young man who had spent some sixteen years in prison, and now a review of the case made clear that he is most likely innocent and should never have been convicted. While Greg Taylor continued to sit behind bars, the district attorney spoke out. And I felt I needed to speak out too. My letter didn't get printed (my average is about one out of every ten), so I offer it here. (I refer to a "misquote," though of course I know that it was -- unfortunately -- anything but a misquote.) Here's the letter:

"I need to point out a glaring misquote in Wednesday's paper. In the article on Greg Taylor's innocence of the crime for which he has been in prison for the past 16 years, Wake district attorney Colin Willoughby is quoted as saying, "The evidence in this case fails to show by clear and convincing evidence that Greg Taylor is innocent...." Surely no representative of our justice system would argue that you are guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent. (Would he?) If that were the standard, few of us would be able to keep ourselves out of prison.
Or have the rules changed?"