“What’s the “other side of the story?” They were exonerated by DNA evidence. What more do you need to know?”
They weren’t exonerated by DNA evidence, they were exonerated by someone’s interpretation of such...and there is a far less than perfect history there.
To answer your question, I’d like to know what evidence was used to convict them. If it were circumstantial, I’d likely agree with them getting cleared - if 20 witnesses, I might think differently.
In any case, I’ve been played by the media enough times to NOT immediately believe what they say.
“They weren’t exonerated by DNA evidence, they were exonerated by someone’s interpretation of such...and there is a far less than perfect history there.
“To answer your question, I’d like to know what evidence was used to convict them. If it were circumstantial, I’d likely agree with them getting cleared - if 20 witnesses, I might think differently.
“In any case, I’ve been played by the media enough times to NOT immediately believe what they say.”
__________
^^This^^.
Unfortunately.
Just as there are freakshow prosecutors perfectly willing to frame and jail clearly innocent men, there are freakshow exonerators perfectly willing to canonize and spring **from** jail clearly guilty men.
Hence the need for more and more specific information IN EVERY SINGLE CASE.
The corruption and virtue signaling industries are displacing seemingly every worthwhile line of work. It’s really becoming suffocating.