And you are wrong again. Yes, I am arguing for the sake of arguing, however, all of my arguments are legit and I do have legitimate rebuttal against you comments. A defence attorney should not believe that his client is innocent, nor is it his job to prove that his client is innocent. His job is to prove that his client MAY BE innocent and it is the prosecutor's job to prove the crime. If the prosecutor fails to prove it beyond the reasonable doubt, the accused person is deemed innocent. What I am saying is that this girl MAY BE innocent, however, she is already convicted in the court of public opinion and already punished by her employer. This is wrong!!! The people who do it (convict and or punish when there is chance she is innocent) are guilty of a much bigger crime than she may be.