Still, its not right in my opinion to release headlines proclaiming him guilty when it has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he was the killer. There is lots of opportunity here for someone else to have been the killer, at least enough to create a reasonable doubt. Teens have sex in parks all the time, and some crazy could easily have attacked her after they parted ways.

​

Just because they think he is the killer and they think they have enough evidence to convict him does not mean the world should automatically proclaim him as guilty.

​

Everyone has the right to a fair trial before we proclaim them guilty, as far as I am concerned. The trial is ongoing and it has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

​

If they had said "we have the murder weapon with his prints on it" i would feel differently, but there was no mention of smoking gun evidence like that.