So the only material evidence was the testimony of someone having "repressed memory" that he was molested 21 years ago, and he was convicted? I can't imagine why this was even allowed to go to a jury, let alone why he would be convicted.
It wasn't a repressed memory. He was not coached by a counselor to "remember" these acts then reported these acts after that. His memories of the rapes came back when he was told of Shanley's arrest and went to a counselor within 12-15 hours with these memories. "Repressed memories" was the defense theory of the case.
See posts 19 and 20. Dozens and dozens of boys have already won a civil suit against Shanley last year. I believe one of those victims committed suicide shortly aftewards.