I have no idea.
But it doesn't matter does it?
In many criminal cases there is physical evidence to go along with eyewitness or video evidence.
From what I've read - in this case there was no physical evidence ONLY eyewitness accounts, and those accounts changed VOLUNTARILY, and INDEPENDENTLY of each other.
As to why Sleasely didn't do it? Don't have a clue on that either Tom. Maybe he suffered from "Low T"? "No-T"?
Perdue DID say she had new evidence that clearly shows racism played a key role on the prosecutors side - perhaps Eaesley didn't have that info? So that for him the overturning of the conviction was enough?
This case was not handled well from the start - the Fed Court saw parts of that and overturned the convictions.
Bev got even more info and issued the pardon of clemency.
She did RIGHT Tom - give credit where it's due because it appears as though she's due the credit for this one.
More information about formatting options