Strauss-Kahn

Based on the severity of the accused crime, was it fair for the media to form a premature opinion about Strauss-Kahn's innocence?

It was unfair for the media to form a premature opinion about Strauss-Kahn's innocence. Strauss Kahn is an IMF director Dominique and his privacy is already given away, and thus such opinions should not be tolerated. The trial was not over yet so it was unfair for them to presume him guilty. The media had little or no evidence and if he was proven innocent, the public would already develop the wrong thoughts about him and speak bad about him already.
Strauss Kahn is the director of Dominique, and he should be spoken well of, but even when such accuses are made by someone with little or no evidence, the media should not speak bad of him even before the trial. The trial is a place to prove someone innocent or guilty, and before the truth is out, people should try to put themselves into Strauss Kahn shoes and think about how he would feel, or how they would feel if the public do not even provide support for you but even criticizes you and your moral would be very low already.
The media should know that whatever they write, would be believed by many people, because they find the media reliable, but when such things are spilled out, it cannot be recovered, just like how spilled water cannot be captured back. And thus, the media would have a high price to pay, if Strauss Kahn is proven innocent.
Thus I feel that it is unfair for the media to form a premature opinion about Strauss Kahn's innocence, especially even before the trial.