Where is all this brilliant evidence now that the SCCRC was supposed to have considered?
The last time I looked at the SCCRC website, innuendo and theories don't count!

In paperwork lodged with the court, Mitchell's legal team argued that the Lord Advocate relied upon evidence identifying Mitchell which was "unfairly obtained and had the effect of rendering his trial unfair and in breach of the accused's rights".
They further argued that his interview with police, carried out when he was 15, was conducted in a way which was "oppressive and constituted an interrogation designed to break the accused and obtain an admission".
They also argued what was described in court as a "Cadder point", namely that Mitchell was interviewed as a suspect but was not given access to legal advice before being quizzed.
So where is there any evidence of his innocence? Thought not!