The verdict is in

But does the public convict before the jury can?

The court of public opinion is perhaps the cruelest in the world. Jurors, like yourself, often require no evidence whatsoever before delivering a swift and sharp guilty verdict.

Recently, Dallas Cowboys Michael Irvin and Erik Williams were summoned to appear in this kangaroo court on charges that Irvin held a gun to a woman's head while Williams and another man raped her.

Columnists, activists, commentators and even the everyday sports fan were quick to hand down their guilty verdicts.

And then the evidence surfaced -- or, more accurately, failed to surface. Their accuser turned out to be a liar, and police closed the case.

Perhaps you were one of the many who quickly decided Irvin and Williams were guilty. But have you asked yourself why you did so?

Perhaps it was because whenever you hear that someone is a suspect or accused of a crime, you figure they're probably guilty.

Perhaps it was because you're always inclined to believe women who report rapes, because it's such a difficult crime for women to report and make public.

Perhaps it was because Irvin is on probation for drug charges and Williams settled out of court in a previous sexual assault case.

Whatever the reason, many people automatically assumed Irvin and Williams were guilty, just like many people quickly, and incorrectly, assumed Richard Jewell set off a bomb at the Olympics.

For some reason, our prejudices cause us to convict before we ever hear the facts. That's a terrible tendency our society needs to re-evaluate and change.

As if that were not enough to think about, then think the potential effects of these false accusations against Irvin and Williams.

The next time a woman bravely comes forward to say she was raped, will you be less likely to believe her? When Nina Shahravan came forward to say Irvin and Williams assaulted her, she turned the two athletes into victims. Most likely, they'll recover.

But Shahravan also made victims of the next women who come forward to make rape claims. Unfairly, some people will use Shahravan's irresponsible actions as an excuse to disbelieve other women with legitimate rape claims. Those women, too, become victims.

As a result of these false convictions and dangerous outcomes, the court of public opinion should face itself with another case: how quickly should we convict?

Before the question is answered, we jurors should take a moment to consider just how many victims our haste can create.