Are there any cases where the real killer was found?

I heard today OJ’s parole ended and that just reminded me that it seems like for murders, nobody keeps looking in cases where the primary suspect gets acquitted. Are there examples where like, some high profile suspect gets acquitted, the search continues and then the real killer is found?

caught in 2018

Owing to California’s statute of limitations on pre-2017 rape cases, DeAngelo could not be charged with 1970s rapes. but he was charged in August 2018 with thirteen related kidnapping and abduction attempts.


Acquitted does not mean found innocent. I just means the prosecution did not offer enough evidence to find the person guilty. Or, at least, not enough evidence to convince jury beyond reasonable doubt the person was guilty.


There have been quite a few cases where the innocent was found innocent from nearly released evidence. Not sure how many lead to a conviction

What is ‘nearly released evidence’?

Don’t you mean, “Arhat is nearly released evidence?”


I thought we found Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman’s real killer.

There was this one guy, a doctor who was found guilty of murdering his wife, but he escaped from prison, intent on finding who he believed was the real killer, a one-armed man…


Or maybe, they found the murderer but couldn’t convict them. Not much point searching for the real killer when you’ve already found them.

But how do you know if you found the murderer if you couldn’t convict him based on evidence?

If the internet says he did it then that’s all the evidence you need.

1 Like

How do you know you found the murderer, even if you did convict someone based on evidence?


Watch some of the Law & Orders where you know the guy did it, but they didn’t get the conviction.

1 Like

I mean but how do you know? The jury didn’t seemed convinced so I don’t see how you would somehow have objective evidence to convince yourself.

Sometimes you just get out-argued. The defense sowed some reasonable doubt. But just becasue there is reasonable doubt (to the jurors) doesn’t mean the man or woman did not perpetrate the crime.

An acquittal doesn’t say the defendant didn’t do it, just that the prosecution didn’t convince the jury that the evidence supported the charges.

Or you have additional evidence that isn’t allowed in trial (e.g. evidence found improperly).

I saw an interview with one of the OJ jurors from a few years back where she stated that she voted to acquit OJ as means for payback for what happened to Rodney King. I guess Nicole and Ronald were involved in that? She stated that she thought that 90% of the other jurors did the same thing she did. Obviously, there’s no way to know what was in the other jurors’ minds, but if true, that’s just all kinds of evil.