I think this thing will keep on being appealed until we're all too old to care.
There was something inconclusive about the evidence, first time around, wasn't there? I'd be interested to learn what new evidence justified this review and you have to wonder why whatever it is didn't emerge in time for the initial trial or the first appeal.
By the way, does the guy they imprisoned get released every time F & S are deemed guilty, on appeal, or are they saying it was a 3-handed effort?