In political philosophy there is a powerful argument against utilitarianism that runs as follows: If utilitarianism is true, then it is sometimes good to punish the innocent. The innocent person may suffer -- which is bad -- but the badness of it might be sufficiently compensated by the goodness that results from others seeing the punishment and gaining happiness and edification. The good outweighs the bad, and so the punishment should proceed.
"If you believe they're guilty, then you get the edification of seeing an evildoer punished. But it only works if you believe it."
It shows two things--how the system goes crushingly forward, even when it is wrong. What if she was innocent, but the honest mistake wasn't as glaringly plain as an address mix up?
It also shows how even a brief period of incarceration can devastate someone's life.
On that note, please don't read this article. Not if you want to remain happy and edified.