what would happen if the rule of law changed to guilty until proved innocent?

Much the same as happens in neighbouring European countries, where that is the law. The Prosecution would cheerfully stack up evidence against you and you'd have to struggle to extricate yourself, sinking further and further into the mire as you did so. There is pressure by those said European neighbours to get us to change our legal system to bring it into line with theirs. Pity help us if this happens.

Impossible !

If someone were Guilty, then sentence would be passed and then there is no need for Defence Lawyers etc. While Not Guilty, everything is Pending their Defence and possibly Innocence and they have the same rights as everyone that has Liberty.

As you may know, that is why it is up to the LAW to prove them Guilty of the Crimes Committed of which they are Accused.

It is Past and Present that the LAW DWELLS and the FUTURE to be . Not FUTURE then PRESENT and PAST, that would be backwards and would hold no STABILITY.

If it were Guilty until proven Innocent, the World would be a Prison.

Hope this Helps !

The number of innocent people being convicted of crimes would skyrocket.

The idea of being innocent until proven guilty (in theory at least) is to try to prevent truly innocent people from being convicted. It's not a perfect system and some do still get convicted, but it is far, far less than would happen the other way around (guilty until proven innocent).

well David, that would probably be the way it is now. Even though it is innocent until proven guilty, it certainly doesnt seem or feel that way. Especially when you are going up against police authorities or any other governmental agency. But seriously, if it did change for real, the jails would be full of people. In fact, there probably would be more jails than apartment complexes. Then, there would be no one working nor paying their taxes, so in the end, the government wouldnt be able to support the majority of population locked up in jail and would go broke. That would be my guess.

Take a look at the number of annual motoring convictions in the UK. They come under your question of guilty until proved innocent.

if that happened, then i think we would have to build a lot more prisons.

Or just do what the americans do and introduce the death penalty for murderers, which i think they should do anyway. I mean, in the UK a life sentnce is only 25 years, which is nothing when theyve murdered someone, especialy when they get let out after 7 years on "good behavior" ...

It used to be like this in the Middle Ages. If accused of a crime you went through a series of 'trial by ordeal'.

If you survived you were being protected by the devil and guilty; if you died, you were innocent.

Tough odds, eh?

I think a similar situation exists in the Southern States of America if you're accused of a crime and happen to be poor and black.

That's a ridiculous question, because it would mean anybody could be arrested for anything. And trying to prove you didn't do something is relatively difficult as it requires a verifiable alibi. What if no-one else knew where you were when the crime was commited?

It is that way in the UK and you didn't know? You need to ease off the American tv and understand your own justice system better.