The myth of “innocent victims”

On crime shows, in the media, there is always this phrase, "innocent victim"—which is thrown around, used almost every time a victim of a crime is first referred to. There is a need (for some reason) to make sure we know that the victim of a crime was also innocent—why?

It seems to me that it seems necessary for the writers and the speakers in these domains to further differentiate the perpetrator and the victim of a crime by emphasizing that the victim was innocent—when there's no reason in general to think that they are

I think it's bullshit—or if you prefer, I think it's unnecessary (or irrelevant) to insist that the victim was so innocent

The victim of murder may be innocent of murder, but they are certainly (except in the case of infant murder) not innocent. Which of us is innocent? I am not innocent. I have perpetrated all sorts of small (and one or two large) crimes against my human neighbors, against my planet, against myself. If someone murders me tomorrow, though, the documentary will call me an innocent victim

When is a victim truly innocent?—almost never

When we say a victim is innocent, it creates the idea that this once-future victim of crime was walking about the world, minding their own business, not hurting anyone, living an upright life, not thinking bad about anyone, not committing any crimes—and then this (other) person came along and fucked with this pure being of light who was peacefully wandering the globe being ever so innocent

Obviously that's not the case—everyone is guilty and innocent in different ways

Is it a person's innocence that makes them an unsuitable target—a tragic target—of violence and crime? Obviously not. Everyone is an unsuitable target for crime—not because we're innocent, but because the crime is bad (not because the criminal is guilty and their victim is innocent)

What do we gain by calling victims innocent? I guess the distinction from their perpetrator via this flowery—inaccurate—word. What is wrong with saying the less dramatic but more truthful statement, "He murdered 50 people"—as opposed to, "He murdered 50 innocent people?" If someone murders 50 people, what in the hecken world makes me think they were all innocent?

If a murderer murders another murderer, am I to call the victim innocent? The victim of a crime is still the victim regardless of whether they're innocent. A murderer who is murdered deserves the same compassion as a non-murderer who is murdered (or a shoplifter who is murdered, or a baby who is murdered)—So why in the name of this blue/green Earth I stand on, is it necessary to call them innocent?