To be candid, a lot of my questions relate to the technical aspects of the bill, so I want to, perhaps, clarify one or two things with you.
When we're talking about miscarriage of justice and whether there's a remedy ordered, miscarriage of justice can take multiple different forms. What you view as a miscarriage and what someone else may view as a miscarriage are completely different. I'm thinking about.... For instance, DNA exonerates somebody. Clearly, that person was factually and, therefore, legally innocent. Then there might be another case where, perhaps, there was something else at play, but the case is not as clear-cut. Do you get where I'm going with this?