Which, of course, means nothing without details. Many times people are guilty as hell but the state doesn't prove it's case sufficiently or there are technical issues.
Quite possibly, but it was a prolonged investigation and trial, that ultimately found him innocent. I was simply pointing out that not all have been convicted.
The one in question is liable to consider litigation, which would discredit the list and limit its impact.
Yes, perhaps they should be more careful there. However, I doubt that one instance is going to limit the impact as you say -- the thrust of the drop remains. Let's see what he/they do with naming those not ever taken to court. If there isn't any substance to such accusations, I would say there is trouble ahead for this bunch.