[Stone Mountain]

In fact, Willingham openly admitted to a fellow inmate that he purposely started this fire to conceal evidence that the children had been abused

It is indeed evidence and relevent. But not necessarily proof. What do we know about the informer inmate? What is he receiving for this testimony? Has he made deals like this before? Has he always been truthful? So yes, I consider it evidence, but not positive proof.

[AxelPaulsenJr]

Nor is the evidence of Mr. Scheck conclusive beyond a reasonable doubt. As has been pointed out, no doubt the prosecution could come up with four "expert" witnesses of their own to dispute Mr. Scheck's.

[connectthedots]

if i was on a jury, I would be highly sceptical of testimony from an inmate. Any person with half a brain isn't going to discuss his case with another inmate, especially if he is guilty. An innocent inmate would also be wise to not discuss his case, either.