Oh geez, you didn't read the decision, they vacated the conviction NOT because he is innocent but he was not given a fair trial.
it said vacated the conviction. that means, he was never found guilty. Sorry, that's the definition. In order for him to be convicted, they'd have to have a third trial. Which means they'd have to find him guilty. So if one was never found guilty, one is still innocent. it's quite simple.
CONVICTION means guilty, he WAS guilty, but vacated for reasons you keep ignoring:
"IV. Conclusion
We do not question the discretion that is vested in prosecutors “over whether charges should be brought in any given case.” Stipetich, 652 A.2d at 1295. We will not undermine a prosecutor’s “general and widely recognized power to conduct criminal litigation and prosecutions on behalf of the Commonwealth, and to decide whether and when to prosecute, and whether and when to continue or discontinue a case.” Id. (quoting 34 See CDO (quoting Blue, 384 U.S. at 255). [J-100-2020] - 79 Commonwealth v. DiPasquale, 246 A.2d 430, 432 (Pa. 1968)). The decision to charge, or not to charge, a defendant can be conditioned, modified, or revoked at the discretion of the prosecutor.
However, the discretion vested in our Commonwealth’s prosecutors, however vast, does not mean that its exercise is free of the constraints of due process. When an unconditional charging decision is made publicly and with the intent to induce action and reliance by the defendant, and when the defendant does so to his detriment (and in some instances upon the advice of counsel), denying the defendant the benefit of that decision is an affront to fundamental fairness, particularly when it results in a criminal prosecution that was foregone for more than a decade. No mere changing of the guard strips that circumstance of its inequity. See, e.g., State v. Myers, 513 S.E.2d 676, 682 n.1 (W.Va. 1998) (explaining that “any change in the duly elected prosecutor does not affect the standard of responsibility for the office”). A contrary result would be patently untenable. It would violate long-cherished principles of fundamental fairness. It would be antithetical to, and corrosive of, the integrity and functionality of the criminal justice system that we strive to maintain.
For these reasons,
Cosby’s convictions and judgment of sentence are vacated, and he is discharged.3"
bolding mine
=======
They stated he WAS convicted and duly sentenced, that is what they vacated.
you are looking foolish here.