You're fundamentally misunderstanding the difference between criminal law, employment law, public opinion and their respective principles and processes.
An employer is allowed to suspend or dismiss an employee before the outcome of a criminal case, because the standard of proof is lower. The employer should factor in reputational risk to business and ultimately if they can still trust the employee to uphold their values.
Public opinion is valid and important in democratic society.
Judges in criminal trials are required to advise jurers they must disregard any media reports / coverage / speculation and establish the facts based only on the evidence heard during the trial.
Ive been involved with law for 20 years and the most surprising thing is that Woolwich haven't now suspended the player involved. As employers, they can't unknow what they know - this isn't saying he's 100% guilty to the criminal standard, simply that there's a tide of information now out in the public domain which a responsible employer ought not ignore