We had one in Colorado a few years ago. A teenage kid was convicted of murder because he lived near a field where it happened and had a sketch book with violent pictures drawn. And the police couldn't find anyone else to finger for it. No physical evidence or witnesses linked him to the crime.
Enough time had passed that a DNA test was available that was not at the time of the conviction and it proved the guy didn't do it.
A combination of a corrupt prosecutor, a bad defense lawyer and a jury not getting what proof beyond a reasonable doubt means can be deadly.
I wish I could disagree (I’ve been a prosecutor in multiple jurisdictions my entire 33 years of practice to a greater or lesser degree). These days I look purely at the facts before me in deciding whether to prosecute, I wish that had always been the case. I was trained by Air Force prosecutors, too many of whom had the, “If he didn’t do this, he did something else” mantra - one of the reasons that the more rank I got, the more I lobbied for never letting a JAG be a Chief of Military Justice until after an assignment as an Area or Circuit Defense Counsel.
Colonel, USAF (ret)