Sloppyjoe
I assume as they are not in jail they were found to be innocent? Good they got there jobs back, a shame it is being brought up if that is the case.
I'm afraid your assumption is wrong - as is your spelling of "there (their) jobs".
In one case, the individual of questionable character, who some colleagues described as narcissistic, served a period of time in jail. How long, and the reasons why are well documented in the free press for anyone with too much time on their hands.
In the other case, which involved the death of a third party, the individual concerned was not convicted. Whilst I personally believe he was innocent, the case was looked at in greater detail, and by folk far better qualified than us laymen observing from afar.
However, your assumption of innocence as they are no longer in jail may not be correct.
You will realise there is a huge difference in the prosecution being unable to secure a conviction, versus the defence being able to prove unequivocally that their client is in fact 100% innocent.
In the case raised by the OP, it may well have been as simple as a poor error of judgment, and the courts appear to have dealt with it quite reasonably.
Still sad for all concerned, not least of which our profession, but also for the individual, his families, and kids.
Kudos to him also for at least putting his side forward.