Thoughts upon states of innocence
Innocence is the beautiful or comfortable place where you were, that is only visible from the uglier or uncomfortable place where you are, and not from thence attainable.
For example, one might say, "What a wonderful world it was that I lived in, before I walked in on my parents having sex. Now I am forever separated from that happy time."
Innocence and morality suffer a very uncomfortable relationship. Morality would like to either appropriate innocence to its cause or reject it, but innocence within itself is neither good nor bad. It is simply a state of being in which you have not been changed by an outside influence. Since our reactions to outside influences display our morality, it may be therefore said that true innocence is perfectly amoral.
Ignorance is very similar to innocence, but possesses a negative connotation. I would say that ignorance is understood to be an active lack of change, while innocence is a passive lack of change. The ignorant person is presumed responsible, while the innocent is not.
It's an intriguing thought that a person who is "found innocent" in a court of law, may also have "lost their innocence" during the grueling treatment of the trial.