It is hard to answer that question for the whole country. It needs some context to answer.
I would say that the phrase, Innocent until proven Guilty is not true. From the moment a person is deemed even a person of interest much less arrested for a crime, there is a social cloud on their head that flashes Guilty.
Once that shroud appears, the person will never be innocent regardless of the outcome. I wrote a hub on it, but the bottom line is at the end of the trial, there are two outcomes, Guilty or Not Guilty, and Not Guilty is not the same as Innocent, because many person will assume guilt, and that the person escaped justice.
Reasonable doubt is a very strange concept for jurors, and today circumstantial evidence muddles that doubt. Today, circumstantial evidence is a story weaved by the prosecution to try and convict without a smoking gun held by the defendant. So the side that tells the most convincing story usually wins.