Obviously it would have been preferable if the allegations had been made sooner, not least because the memories of both prosecution and defence witnesses are likely to be less reliable after a long period of time. However a long delay in making the allegations does not mean they are untrue.

Lizzie has identified some claims made in court which she believes do not stand up. If true, that does not in itself undermine other more convincing evidence. We do not, and cannot, know what weight the jury placed on that evidence. We do know that the jury decided there was sufficient evidence to convict, even taking into account the time which has elapsed.

Lizzie is entitled to her opinion, but like so many of her opinions it doesn't seem to be founded on the evidence, just on her feeling that something isn't as she would like it to be.