Every once in a while, court cases really do take over the sports pages - not just in perception, as in observers saying, "Man, they should just run the police blotter instead of the box scores,'' but in reality. This is one of those times.

The obvious, slap-you-in-the-face one is the Duke lacrosse story, which is destined to wear everybody out between now and the possible trial, which some have said might not be for a year. That traffic in ideas, accusations and name-calling is going to be very limited here, I can promise you that.

Now, though, here come two other significant ones - and since we're talking about the Duke case and whether conclusions were jumped to, innocent-until-proven-guilty was ignored and misinformation was flung about, the two are even more significant in this context.

First ... the Love Boat incident. Everyone remembers - if he or she is being honest - whether anyone connected to the story was presumed guilty or innocent based on the volumes written and said about it. But as it turns out, of the four then-Vikings eventually charged, one, Daunte Culpepper, had the charges dropped, and another, Moe Williams, was cleared on two and convicted on one misdemeanor. The coverage of those two court outcomes has been almost invisible compared to the original stories that came out long before any charges were filed. It didn't seem to enrage many people at the time, though.

And now, Jayson Williams is back. He is about to be re-tried on charges from the 2002 shooting death of a limo driver in Williams' New Jersey home. He was acquitted in 2004. Again, he got very little benefit of the doubt at the time it happened, and considering that one charge is being brought up again, he's not getting it this time, either.

Full disclosure: when I was writing for the San Francisco Chronicle, I came as close as one possibly could to saying after his acquittal that he was guilty - and did say that before his trial began, it was hard for anyone to believe he was guilty because we thought he "knew'' him so well and he didn't seem like that type.

Again, while that's a dangerous line to cross, the topic of how much image plays into preliminary guilt or innocence is always worth discussing, whether charges are filed, convictions are handed down or not. High-profile suspects (Vikings players, NBA stars, big-time college athletes) get treated different, period, by those defending them and those opposing them, and by those in the middle. None of it makes what is written about them intrinsically wrong or right, no matter how loudly some people scream their positions.

But you do have to wonder what makes some guilty at first mention of their alleged involvement, and what makes others the subject of such vigorous defenses by the public.

Meanwhile, the NBA playoffs are starting tomorrow, and it's clear that they're going to get swallowed up again. If the answer to the Question of the Day in today's paper is any indication, the haters are out in full force already. Funny, everyone in my circle can hardly wait until tomorrow when the games start, yet we never hear from them, only from people who are still distraught over Michael, Magic and Larry retiring and who still wish there were more two-hand chest passes and 15-foot set shots.

Oh well, I'll be watching, and it'll be hard to work in time to worry about who won't be.