Proven guilty

[suthdj]

Am I missing something?

Prosecutors appealed to the state Supreme Court, which issued a unanimous decision last month saying that Fuger was wrong to overturn the convictions because Gould and Taylor hadn't proven their innocence. The high court ordered a new habeas corpus trial for the two men.

http://news.yahoo.com/once-exonerated-c ... 51348.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[C-dub]

Am I missing something?

Prosecutors appealed to the state Supreme Court, which issued a unanimous decision last month saying that Fuger was wrong to overturn the convictions because Gould and Taylor hadn't proven their innocence. The high court ordered a new habeas corpus trial for the two men.

http://news.yahoo.com/once-exonerated-c ... 51348.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Possibly, but I'm not really sure either. It may be possible, though, that since they were already convicted that in order to win on appeal one must prove their innocence of what they have already been convicted of. I wonder what evidence the appeals judge had that he thought showed "manifest injustice?" He didn't release them based on any new evidence, but rather something more akin to some kind of prejudice on the part of the court in the original trial. IMHO

[Texas Dan Mosby]

They were tried and found guilty of murder by a jury of their peers.

While the state has the burden of proof during trial, once found guilty, that burden shifts to the guilty party to prove innocence.