Does response D answer the question 1.What arguments would you make if one of the males now says he had nothing to do with the alleged crime, and another man has confessed? In the case that Matias Reyes confesses, there are several grounds that might be used to support the first man's innocence, as he claims he had nothing to do with the alleged crime. First, Reyes' confession contradicts the other accused persons' involvement, especially if it provides details about the conduct that only the perpetrator would be aware of on their own. Second, the lack of actual evidence linking the accused individual to the crime that he is suspected of committing can lend credence to his claims of innocence. If Reyes' DNA was discovered at the scene of the crime rather than the accused's DNA, it would be extremely beneficial to the defense's case. The confessions' reliability may be questioned if evidence shows that they were obtained under pressure or coercion. The defendant's confession must be considered in light of the surrounding circumstances. Regarding Reyes' confession, thoroughly evaluating all evidence, including forensic data and potentially misinterpreted witness testimony, is critical. Finally, when determining legal precedents linked with this new evidence, it may be helpful to consider previous situations in which new confessions resulted in acquittals. The defense could use this material to argue in favor of the defendant's innocence