To convince someone without solid evidence is nothing more than persuasion.
You may have been led to believe he was guilty (thats the prosecutor's whole job!) , ,the jury may have been convinced he was guilty (oh he didnt cry or sob or look heartbroken during the trial? He must be guilty!!! Everyone reacts and behaves the same way dont they? So easy to define guilt by observing a complete stranger to you).... but there's still no solid proof that he did it.
No video recording of him in the act, no dna evidence .. no nothing.
Justice should be just.
If he is guilty then being in prision all his life is justice.
If he is not guilty but found guilty on circumstancial evidence and executed for it... there is no justice there but a crime.
Should we go and prosecute the executioner, jury, judge and lawyers for murder then? Cause they killed the wrong guy. on cold blood. premeditated murder.
Imo he should get life in prision..the evidence against him is big but not solid. everything points to him. So keep him in jail.
If solid evidence later shows he's guilty, then sure, go ahead and pop him. If said evidence shows hes innocent then the system will have to make damn sure all the years he lost in prision will be made up for.. for if I was sent to prision for something i didnt do and spent a decade there you bet your arse id sue the system to the point where even my grandkids will be living la vida loca.