Uncorroborated accomplice testimony is insufficient to convict someone. See https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/500/708.html https://www.justia.com/cr

Uncorroborated accomplice testimony is insufficient to convict someone. See https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/500/708.html https://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/calcrim/500/708.html, among others. Why was he convicted? Because the law matters only when it's convenient. I used to believe that "ignorance of the law is no excuse". I no longer do. The people enforcing the laws (prosecutor, judge, police, etc.) are explicitly protected from misapplying the law. There are excuses for them for not knowing the law, or not applying it correctly. I claim the same rights as them. If ignorance of the law is an excuse for them, it's an excuse for me. And yes, on the bare face of it, your friend should have been found not guilty.