I think I may have missed something while watching the first episode. I agree that the convictions had to be over turned. The fact that the person testing the evidence both scientifically as a in the same manner as the person who had been arrested for possessing them. So she fouled up the case. It's no different than evidence being procured from a suspects home without a warrant. I agree that the prosecutors and states attorney general should've actually participated in the trials they skived off. However I'm afraid I don't see how the people convicted were victims of anything. They were arrested for breaking drug laws. Unless arresting officer planted the drugs on those convicted they still had drugs on their person when arrested. So.... they weren't so much wrongly convicted as they were convicted with evidence that shouldn't have been admissible in their trial but that does me they weren't guilty. However you feel about the laws they broke they're still the law and if you don't think they should be then you can change the law but in the meantime until you've successfully change the law you have to adhere to it or face the consequences. So I agree their really wasn't much of a choice their convictions had to be over turned but that doesn't mean they were innocent it just means they got off due to the Prosecutors disregard for due process and following the letter of the law. The prosecutors and attorney general should be held accountable and those who had their convictions overturned shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth. You got a rare get out of jail free card but don't forget had you not broken the law you never would have needed it so maybe filing lawsuits is a step too far. Unless I missed something they aren't victims.
Review of How to Fix a Drug Scandal
