>>213648646 (OP)Probably.
Normies have been conditioned to think that if any flaw can be exposed in the prosecutions case, or if any bias can be demonstrated on the prosecutions side, that translates into the accused being factually innocent.
See for example leftists arguing that basically any black person convicted of anything before 1970 or so is innocent because someone on the accusing side was racist.
Ross Cheit's work on the so-called "satanic panic" of the 1980s is another eye opener - in the late 90s and 2000s after the "satanic panic" narrative was firmly established, there was a rush to exonerate anyone convicted of sexually abusing a kid in a daycare setting in the 80s. While some of the exonerated were likely factually innocent people who got caught in the dragnet, some were clearly guilty and were cleared anyways - there are people who literally made porn with their victims who are now listed as "victims of mass hysteria."
Factually innocent people being found guilty does obviously happen but is rarer than tv and movies would have you believe.