In the book "Monster" by Walter Dean Myers, was it clearly stated if Steven is guilty or innocent or do they not say?
Though the trial ends with Steve Harmon declared "not guilty," the fact of whether or not he was a part of the convenience store robbery is less clear. Most readers, I think, believe that Steve did take part in the crime, due to several inconsistencies in his story.
For example, when he is questioned on the stand, Steve denies being in or around the drugstore at all the day of the robbery (pg 223). Earlier in the story, however, he said he was in the drug store that day, just "looking around" (pg 115) and later he claims that he was "buying mints" in the store the day of the robbery (pg 140).
Another example that should make readers suspicious of Steve is when he is listening to a testimony of the day of the robbery. He recalls himself that day and describes himself “walking down the street, trying to make my mind a blank screen” (pg 128). Trying to fade the film of his mind to black is a trick readers know Steve does when he doesn't like reality. Why else would he need to do this if he weren't involved?
On final piece of evidence is Steve's obsession with his own goodness. He is terrified throughout the book that he is a monster, a bad person. In fact, that is the reason he is making his screenplay of the trial - to prove that he isn't. An innocent person on trial would not have these concerns with his own conscious.
Despite all these examples that raise a reader's suspicion, the story never explicitly says that Steve was a part of the robbery. However, most close readers would point to these examples as evidence that he did commit the crime.