This comment doesn't strike me as especially controversial so much as annoying and preachy, ignoring the facts around his point of view already being shared. Ag

This comment doesn't strike me as especially controversial so much as annoying and preachy, ignoring the facts around his point of view already being shared. Aggressively drawing lines in the sand on principles without context is meaningless. Pre-empting a comment with "this will be controversial... lambaste me if you disagree" is just asking for an unnecessary fight. It doesn't matter what you think on the case. Presumed innocent until proven guilty is a good paradigm for courts, but you're just some guy, who is not obligated to hold an opinion on this case at all. It's perfectly fine to say "I don't know and I don't think I've heard enough to judge one way or the other", or, if that's your take, not say anything at all. Supporting an opinion of innocence without evidence of innocence is equally as dumb as supporting a side of guilt without evidence of guilt.