No, he is suggesting "innocent until proven guilty", you are suggesting the opposite.
This is a "have you stopped beating your wife" question, what could any person say except "there is no evidence that I am untrustworthy". How do you mathematically verify a person?
The technically correct answer is "mu" or "wu". It's an asian term for absence. In the context of a questions, it means that the question cannot be answered correctly due to a lack of preconditions or because the answers are restricted to a set which does not contain the correct answers.
"Did you stop beating your wife" must be answered wu if you have not been beating your wife. "stopping X" requires the precondition that X was happening at the time of the question.
"Am I trustworthy", as the parent comment pointed out, must be answered wu as well, because it probably is impossible to be universally and unconditionally trustworthy.
Even if it is not, judging if one will be unconditionally trustworthy in all contextes, actions and all possible futures of this situation cannot be estimated with enough confidence, unless your life will end within a very short timespan.
This is a "have you stopped beating your wife" question, what could any person say except "there is no evidence that I am untrustworthy". How do you mathematically verify a person?