Question #1: Are the charges against S legitimate? Is this a fair trial?

The charges, impiety/introducing strange gods, and corrupting the youth, and in order possibly legitimate, and very hardly legitimate. This is of course if we take the perspective of the Greeks. In that perspective, whether or not the charge is actually true or false is really only a matter of relying on Socrates word. In his discussion with Euthyphro he seems to pretty fully understand the gods of the time and how they operate, like how he disproves Euthyphro's arguement by mentioning that all the gods like different things, and he goes to give examples of this. By "introducing strange gods" they seem to allude to the muse-like spirit Socrates claims to know guides him and his decisions in many things. Besides the technical fact that Socrates does not refer to this spirit as a "god" nor does he believe it is one, Socrates has never at all attempted to make others follow this spirit, or praise it or sacrifice to it. Socrates believes it is a personal guide and has not tried to spread this to anyone else, and I would think that "introducing a strange god" would mean to somebody other than himself.

As for whether Socrates' trial was fair, that again is a matter of perspective. By the Greeks' perspectives it was a perfectly valid and democratic trial, aside from the question of the legitimacy of the actual charges. In today's society, however, Socrates would most definitely not hve been condemned, as for one thing, greek society paid little or no attention to physical proof, the very keystone of today's legal system. The Greek legal system was one relying more on how well a person spoke (or as Socrates said, how much they pleaded and appealed to the judges), which now has very little no no standing today in how the accused is judged. However, then there was no such thing as an acquittal based on a lack of evidence, or the mandate of "innocence until proven guilty". Socrates may well have hit the nail on the proverbial head when he states that the judges will judge based on their preconceived notions of him rather than the facts.

Topic #2: Possibility of Constant Guilt?

The possibility of constant guilt doesn't immediately strike me as being particularly plausible. Speaking entirely personally, I've found that I haven't hung on to any sort of guilt for very long at all. I admit very freely that I was an awful liar when I was younger, and I don't mean "awful" like I was bad at it; I mean "awful" like I did it almost all the time. Long, long ago I stopped feeling any sort of guilt for things like that. It is only occassionally, when something reminded me specifically of it, that I even remembered that I might have been guilty of that at one time. I might feel guilt again when I remember what I did, but the fact is, those memories come few and far between and I don't feel a lot of remorse for anything after that. Sure, it's prefectly natural to feel guilty for the misfortunes of others, but to be frank, nobody really gives too much of a care for anything much other than themselves. Take, say, a bus ride, and you happen to overhear that somebody's relative is dying of some horrible disease. "How awful," you think, and then poof. It's gone. The feeling passes.

Same goes for guilt. Especially that for the people of Omelas. Yes, it's quite the heavy feeling of guilt, even with the guilt at the horrible status of the child being counteracted somewhat by knowing that it is not quite your fault and your fault alone. However... consciously, that is, to think exclusively of the child and to wallow in that guilt, is not only bordering on psychotic obsessiveness, but it's unhealthy. Guilt is a weighty emotion for a person to bear, never mind if that guilt was felt constantly. People who feel constant guilt go mad. People who think they are forever doing things wrong, failing somehow, form tragic complexes and psychological problems. Therefore, really, feeling constant guilt of any sort is really not so much a show of compassion and concern so much as an indicator of psychological ill-being.