Don Long is convicted of second-degree murder for killing a woman he had been seeing over the last few months. The court sentenced him to 30 years in jail. One year after his trial, Don admits that he withheld evidence that
would have cleared him. He states he did so to protect his twin brother, who actually
committed the crime, but who was dying of cancer at the time. He further states that he
did not want his brother to spend the last years of his life behind bars. His brother has
since died. The evidence is conclusive as to Don's innocence. Should the court set aside his conviction due to the new evidence?
What policies would support the court in not
doing so?