Has Bay Area media already convicted Mirkarimi? Current SF Sheriff under the Gun

I've been following the Ross Mirkarimi story and have come to the conclusion that the SF Sheriff, at least for now, has been convicted by the SF media.

Don't get me wrong--I have no sympathy for Mirkarimi, and the DA's case, based on the evidence that's been reported from the affidavit looks pretty clear cut. But, nevertheless, Mirkarimi hasn't been convicted yet. And yes, domestic abuse is a very serious subject--but the "court of public opinion" is not the court of law.

Yet, Mirkarimi has been hung out to dry. Radio shows in the morning have called for his resignation, (KSFO). A few local critics have said the Chronicle coverage has been decidedly, 100%, negative and all but asked for his head. And yes, based on what we all know, he looks guilty from here.

Let's not concentrate on the merits of the alleged crime(s); that's not the issue I'm exploring here. I'm wondering about the ethics of the local media in SF-- some, that have essentially judged the case. Just suppose we haven't heard all the evidence? Logical thought.

It's an issue worth looking at--how do you see it?

*Follow me on Twitter