Here is what you are missing: the reason these people are exonerated is that 20-30 years ago scientists realized DNA identification was possible, but not yet available. So in cases where identity was an issue, and DNA evidence was available, the DNA was preserved for the future. So in cases where the conviction was based on circumstantial evidence, or eyewitness ID, if the DNA doen't fit, they should've acquitted, and now the innocent guy gets out and gets some compensation for his ordeal.
The idea that some modern day criminal/CSI tech could manufacture a crime scene where, magically, five years later exonerating evindence will appear (remember someone on the outside has to believe he is innocent and take up the case, the prisons are full of guilty criminals who all claim to be innocent) is ludicrous.
So, yes, dumbest post ever. Congratulations.
Certainly Hollywood has an enormous influence on people's thinking, which often muddles their thought processes. Reality is different, however, and I don't see how such a charade could be successfully executed.
Indeed, if the plan required a large conspiracy, that would have to include the police, the prosecutors, the jury, and the witnesses, and they would all have to conspire for the benefit of the criminal and his plan, only for the verdict to be reversed years later. In the end, the payoff is only $80k a year. It doesn't make sense.
I was never talking about past cases.
And as far as DNA, there’s lots of crime, particularly nonviolent crime where DNA plays no roll.
Bank scams, confidence scams, robbery, you name it.
There are people who will kill for $80,000. Just because you won’t doesn’t mean others won’t.
It is you who watch too much CSI. People get convicted all the time with just circumstantial evidence. No science magic involved at all. Setting up a crime event so it points to you isn’t difficult with a little planning.