Omitting "blanket" does not change the meaning. "A blanket presumption of innocence" means everybody has that right. "A presumption of innocence" also means everybody has that right, the right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty IS a "blanket" (universal) human right!
Try as they might, Rowling's tiresome flying monkeys are unable to show how the right to be presumed innocent, until proven guilty could be anything other than "a blanket." If some people, people they dislike, are to be excluded from that right, then nobody has that right.
A "presumption of innocence" that is not "a blanket" provision, covering everyone, is no longer a right, but a privilege accorded to some & withheld from others. Presumption of innocence is for everybody or does not exist. 
Rowling's acolytes then move on to say that, despite using a common legal phrase, "presumption of innocence," Rowling is not talking about the criminal law, but about safeguarding - often they say something like this...
"Safeguarding" means measures to protect children & vulnerable adults from abuse. Minimally, it involves a background check for criminal records for staff & volunteers of services for children & adults. Needless to say, trans people are subject to the same checks as anyone else.
As it happens, I work in an area where safeguarding measures apply. Safeguarding checks are done on women & men. Women are not assumed to be safe & exempted from any check, so how can a GRC give "a category of people" an undeserved "blanket presumption of innocence?" It can't.
"Social workers, teachers, priests & doctors" are all subject to background checks, women just as stringently as men. Is this barm brack seriously suggesting that the GRA somehow would make trans women as "a category of people" exempt from normal safeguarding checks?
Trans people applying for jobs where safeguarding applies are subject to all the same checks as cis people - plus whatever random dollop of prejudice the individual interviewer happens to have. Trans people are NOT given a pass on safeguarding & the GRA could not change this.
A 👏GRC👏 cannot👏 exempt👏 anybody👏 from👏 vetting👏 precautions👏 because👏 women & men are subject👏 to👏 the👏 same👏 measures.👏 #safeguarding
Scowling Growling Rowling moves on almost seamlessly ("Incidentally...) to prisoners. Prisoners, as a "category of people" can hardly be said to enjoy "a blanket presumption of innocence." Hard to see how she could believe trans women prisoners would under GRA reforms.
INCIDENTALLY, prison sometimes is a "space to discover your innate sense of self." Not a perfect space, of course, but in the lives of people who are wretchedly poor, often unwell & often homeless, as most prisoners are, prison is predictable & safer than outside...
Prisoners do "find themselves" sometimes in prison. People detox in prison, get treatment for health problems, throw themselves into an Open University course in philosophy or find religion. People have time to think about their lives. All of this is well known.
I'm a social care worker, worked with homeless men the last 22 years, a v similar demographic to prisoners. If I had a penny for every time somebody said "I'm going to ask the judge to lock me up so I can sort my head out in prison," I could buy one of JK Rowling's spare castles.
If your life on the outside is one where you're not even guaranteed food or shelter, prison life can be an oasis of comparative calm that gives time for reflection. It's bizarre that this even needs to be said. It's why prisons have schools & detox programmes & chaplains & books.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
