Actual Innocence
Our first question is simple: What evidence shows this person may not have committed the crime?
ROAR Kingdom distinguishes factual innocence from legal error, sentencing error, and procedural issues. A case can contain serious constitutional or procedural problems without proving the person did not commit the crime. Our strongest cases identify affirmative evidence pointing away from the convicted person or materially undermining the State’s theory of guilt.
Evidence that may support innocence
- DNA or forensic evidence excluding the defendant
- Digital, phone, location, video, or timestamp evidence
- Credible alibi evidence
- Evidence identifying or implicating an alternate suspect
- Credible recantations or materially inconsistent witness statements
- Evidence that testimony was pressured, rewarded, unsupported, or demonstrably false
- Physical impossibility or a timeline that cannot work
- Newly available testing or changed forensic science
- Exculpatory evidence that was missing, withheld, or never presented
- Material contradictions between police reports, testimony, forensic records, arguments, and appellate descriptions of the case
What we separate
Factual Innocence
Evidence suggesting the person did not commit the crime.
Legal Error
Constitutional, evidentiary, procedural, or trial error. Important, but not automatically proof of innocence.
Sentencing / Procedure
Problems involving punishment, deadlines, waiver, exhaustion, preservation, or jurisdiction rather than whether the person committed the offense.
The ROAR evidence discipline
We separate documented fact, reported fact, allegation, inference, legal argument, and unresolved question. We do not turn claims into facts, and we do not assume guilt or innocence from a conviction or an allegation. We follow the evidence.
