Analogies are always good in law, I kind of got lost in yours but if you looked at my law text books you wouldn't find notes but pictures in my margins, likewis

Analogies are always good in law, I kind of got lost in yours but if you looked at my law text books you wouldn't find notes but pictures in my margins, likewise they may not help you but the process no doubt helped me flush out the ideas/concepts and remember the same. Even running it thru my mind I do see the practical examples of distinguishing between the restoration of property and liberty when they have been deprived based on conviction and later overturned. In fact I am sure I could provide examples where even people on here might agree the property should not be returned to the defendant after the overturned conviction. A lot of those examples would be where the defendant is actually guilty of the crime, but the conviction is over turned and the victim is forced to return restitution on top of seeing the defendant set free. Nevertheless, in theory victims have another remedy in civil court at a lower standard than the beyond reasonable doubt of criminal court, but I could see that being traumatic to the victim in a lot of instance and likely so let down by the system they would never pursue it or if they did and won they may never be able to collect again. It is very tricky no matter what the law is I'll find a set of facts that when applied results in an unjust outcome.