The scale has tipped too far toward legal niceties
when the perpetration of every heinous act is “alleged.”  Just as 2^nd Amendment freaks have
turned “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” into an NRA-led overflow
of guns and paranoia, leftwing defenders of personal liberties have caused
everyone to fear pointing an accusatory finger at a criminal and saying:  “He did it!”  Instead we are compelled by political correctness and fear of lawsuit to
refer to all dirtbags as “alleged dirtbags.”  We must retard our rush to judgment and be satisfied with “he allegedly
did it.”

Things have gotten out of hand.  Even in a case involving multiple
eyewitnesses, surveillance photos depicting a defendant committing the crime,
and a taped confession, we are still expected to refer to him as the “alleged”
robber, the “alleged” killer, or the “alleged” bomber.  The reason for this is that a legal fiction
has filtered out of the courtroom and, over the years, permeated our
consciousness.  That legal fiction is
this:  a defendant is presumed to be
innocent unless & until he is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. 

It is necessary in our system of justice for jurors
to follow this basic precept.  As triers
of the fact in a contested criminal trial, they are instructed regarding this
presumption of innocence and they must apply it.  The prosecution has the burden of overcoming
this presumption in order for someone to stand convicted by these jurors. 

Outside the courtroom, however, in polite,
intelligent society, there is nothing wrong with non-jurors concluding from the
evidence that the media so insistently bombards us with that a culprit is, in
fact, guilty.  You have the right to
think whatever you want to think without being forced to reach “alleged”
conclusions.  Common sense ought not be
compelled to take a back seat to legal fictions and political correctness. 

Tamerlan & Dzhokhar Tsarnaev killed people in
Boston.  Even without having to sit in a
jury box and observe whatever evidence may be sifted onto the record in a
trial, I am comfortable with my conclusion.  “Alleged” does not even occur to me.  I see no need to do what the writer of a recent New Yorker piece did and refer to them in this fashion:  “the alleged (and there’s no reason to doubt
the accuracy of the allegation) perpetrators.”  That bit of editorial mumbo-jumbo is unnecessary, conflicting, and –
finally – absurd.  The writer of the
item, I might conclude, is an “alleged” intelligent individual.