Originally Posted by
pineapple stu
If the DNA evidence was as shabby as was made out, it's not a terrible decision. You can't lock someone up for life because they maybe probably did it, but there's no real evidence. In that case, what's terrible is the police work, not the decision.
Also, we've a case where one person is dead and two others have, it seems, been wrongfully locked up for four years and yet we get nicknames based on the person's physical looks? A bit classless there, surely. (That's not necessarily a dig at SkStu, cos I know it's what many in the media called her)