- Feb 2017
It evidently means only that the "burden of proof" lies with the accusers;-that he is not to be called on to prove his innocence, or to be dealt with as a criminal till he has done so; but that they arc to bring their charges against him, which if he can repel, he stands acquiltt!d.
I quite like this. A man is not "innocent or guilty" during his trial, but is instead just an observer to his accusers and the evidence that is put against him. We shouldn't determine one's innocence or guilt by their argument or appearance alone, but instead look at the total case and find the more logically supported argument. We should use similar presumption in rhetoric, and challenge those presumptions only when our Burden of Proof is too big to ignore.
It's basically a call to support the more sound arguments.