In a second or successive Habeas petition, the clear and convincing proof of actual innocence must have a direct nexus to the facts underlying the claim of the constitutional violation, and it examines all of the evidence in the record available to the reviewing court, without regard to admissibility.
The facts from the earlier findings that are to be taken to be true are not the ultimate determinations, but the evidentiary proffers underlying the claims; a presumption of correctness is attributed to findings of authenticity. A letter held to be a copy of an unavailable original is sufficiently established as to authorship, but may be questioned for probity and reliability.
Where the circumstances of the newly discovered evidence credibly suggest the petitioner's involvement in forgery, a rational factfinder might reasonably weigh the consciousness of guilt suggested by the events in determining the reliability and probity of the evidence.