Talk about your "cold cases" - 400 years ago? How can they prove now that the individuals were NOT witches, after 400 years?
It appears that 5 of the 7 were already exonerated - at their trials - so a new "exoneration" would be a bit redundant, wouldn't it?
As for those convicted, in addition to the above lack of evidence after 400 years that they were NOT witches, if they've already been convicted, doesn't that require a pardon from the governor rather than an exoneration? I think that exoneration ship already sailed with the conviction...
.
It appears that 5 of the 7 were already exonerated - at their trials - so a new "exoneration" would be a bit redundant, wouldn't it?
As for those convicted, in addition to the above lack of evidence after 400 years that they were NOT witches, if they've already been convicted, doesn't that require a pardon from the governor rather than an exoneration? I think that exoneration ship already sailed with the conviction...
.
“Trouble rather the tiger in his lair than the sage among his books. For to you kingdoms and their armies are things mighty and enduring, but to him they are but toys of the moment, to be overturned with the flick of a finger.”
― Gordon R. Dickson, Tactics of Mistake
― Gordon R. Dickson, Tactics of Mistake