Innocent until proven guilty... someone's told the CPS.

Apparently some hunters charged under the Hunting Act have had the case against them dropped. Normally I wouldn't be too fussed since I've never had a strong opinion on the rights and wrongs of hunting, except for the fact that the retards who brought rabbits, foxes and deer to Australia probably shouldn't have got on the fucking boat in the first place if they missed that sort of thing so much. If hunting animal X is important to you then moving to somewhere that animal X doesn't exist is pretty fucking stupid, but I suppose it was a different age then (i.e. a more stupid one). Anyhow, I was curious and had a look anyway, and I noticed this:

The CPS said yesterday that in the light of a High Court ruling in February, that it was for the prosecution to prove a hunt was not carrying out exempt hunting, it would drop the case.

Why the fuck was this a surprise to the Crown Prosecution Service fucktards? Hasn't it always been for the prosecution to prove guilt rather than the defendant to prove innocence? It's innocent until proven guilty, not the other way round. It's good that the CPS has had this little reminder from a court, but a bit fucking worrying that they needed it at all.