I'm constantly astonished by how many appeals get found "not guilty" after all, despite years of unfair imprisonment for people wrongly convicted. The media tends to ignore them if it can. However the Mail has given this one quite hefty coverage.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2866816...-cleared-appeal.html

JK I find the reporting on this acquittal lacking. Initial reading finds the person a member of a gang claiming he knows the real killer and that there was some gun residue.
So he does not look all that innocent either. But I then ask myself why would the CCRC and in particular the group of students on the Innocent Project and a pro bono section get involved if there was not something more!
Well then I look closer. One guy Brown is acquitted of the murder because he has an accepted alibi but is convicted on the wounding of the other victim. Later that conviction was quashed because it was not consistent. Well now as someone would say of course he either was there or not there can't part there to avoid the murder and then be there to wound. Bottomline shows the jury were selected from another world or something. Or they are just like that in Manchester!!! Next I read that the other two admit to possessing firearms. But neither is considered guilty of the murder. George has the residue but no mention of firearm possession. Odd again, inconsistent. Then to top it off there is an American style plea bargin and Cunningham turns witness for the prosecution. What for to save himself. What a mix up the trial must of been. That the Appeal court considers it.
And that is my final point as there is no automatic right of appeal in regards to how the bizarre court and jury came to their conclusions and the case is not a clear case of mistaken identity then it can only be because even the highly biased Appeal court could not help to notice the original trial was screwed up and used the excuse of the residue for the appeal after much pressure to announce the obvious that the original convition was not safe which may or may not be the correct statement in this one particular case.