No, that's not what I'm saying at all.
Remember, this is all predicated on the assumption that the cases represent "true" punish verdicts. The only reason we have to believe this is that Lyte says that he believes it. If you believe that Lyte is lying, or a poor judge of Tribunal guilt, then none of this has any relevance.
Overall, there are three possible scenarios that result in this situation:
A.) People are really innocent:
A1.) The Tribunal is wrong, the reason doesn't matter.
B.) People are really guilty:
B1.) The Tribunal is right, but for the wrong reasons.
B2.) The Tribunal is right, for the right reasons.
The crux of my argument is that B does not imply B1, it implies either B1 or B2.
You may disagree. But I hope my theory at least makes sense.
I know your argument: You think that somehow it was possible that every PhD who uses the tribunal happened to review that case and used their superior intellect to make the right verdict (of course based on Lyte being an infallible deity).
It's ridiculous....There is nothing in those cases that hints to absolute guilt. If there is, please point it out. Please point out what irrefutably makes each and every one of those an absolute punish, or implies a high degree of guilt from that DATA (or as the common man calls it, evidence).
I'm all eyes.