Teina Pora, who was wrongly incarcerated for more than 20 years for the rape and murder of 39-year-old Susan Burdett, has been offered more than $2.5 million in compensation from the Government.
Justice Minister Amy Adams made the announcement yesterday, along with confirmation she had written to 41-year-old Mr Pora to apologise on behalf of the Crown.
The figure was in line with the minimum expected, as laid out in Cabinet guidelines, but well short of what many - his lawyers included - believed he should receive.
It is something of a hollow victory, but a victory nonetheless, given the major miscarriage of justice as a result of pressure on a vulnerable, mentally impaired, innocent teenager in a police case that was fundamentally flawed.
After more than two decades, two trials and several appeals, the Privy Council in London quashed all his convictions last year.
Mr Pora's legal team then made a formal claim for compensation, and a review was carried out by High Court Judge Rodney Hansen who made recommendations to the Justice Minister.
Mr Pora met the Cabinet's compensation criteria: wrongful conviction, prison time, a conviction quashed on appeal and - most importantly - innocence on the balance of probabilities.
Compensation was calculated based on the Cabinet's starting figure of $100,000 for each year in jail.
Most would agree no figure could adequately compensate Mr Pora for what he lost and endured. How is it possible to measure loss of innocence (in every respect) and freedom?
To compensate for a tarnished reputation, for emotional and physical hardship, for the stress, anguish and fear of a prison environment?
For lost time with friends and family, the lost opportunity to forge new relationships, to love and be loved, to marry, to have more children?
How is it possible to measure lost educational and employment opportunities and potential lost income?
To compensate for loss of travel, the inability to acquire any assets, or to become part of a community?
Mr Pora's prospects may not have looked good, but no-one knows how his life might have developed.
The question now is has he finally been treated fairly?
It seems the Cabinet guidelines were followed to the letter.
But Arthur Allan Thomas received $950,000 in the late 1970s for nine years' wrongful imprisonment for the Crewe murders, and in 2001 David Dougherty received almost $870,000 for three years' wrongful imprisonment for rape.
The numbers just don't stack up when it comes to Mr Pora.
Judge Hansen recommended the consumer price index be taken into account by the Government when making its offer and he also noted that "the state of the evidence is such that, in my view, he could have proved his innocence to an even higher level'' than the innocent beyond all reasonable probabilities threshold.
Mr Pora has been let down again.
There is no legal right of appeal (the compensation is in a goodwill gesture not a legal obligation).
Ms Adams said she is open to reviewing the Cabinet guidelines for awarding compensation.
It would have been a nobler gesture had she done so before making the offer.
Mr Pora had the mental age of a child, was easily seduced by the apparent kindness of police and by their reward money, and effectively led to his confession.
He didn't stand a chance.
What is remarkable is the lack of anger.
He is a quietly spoken, gentle man, who exudes calm, acceptance - and forgiveness.
He will most likely simply take the money and move on with his life.
It is a considerable sum.
And he received the apology he wanted, too.
But the sorry story is not over.
For, lest we forget, Susan Burdett and her friends and family are still awaiting justice.
