May evidence of innocence be 'new' under Schlup even if it was available at the time of trial?

is: May evidence of innocence be “new” under Schlup even if it was available at the time of trial? 2. Trial counsel admits that he never investigated Rodney’s guilt even though he believed that Rodney was the true perpetrator. Counsel thereby failed to investigate and develop evidence of Rodney’s threats to kill one of the decedents (the newly estrange d mother of his two children) as well as physical evidence that fit more closely with Rodney than with Rankin. As an alternative to its Schlup ruling, the Eighth Circuit held that counsel performed reasonably “given the lack of evidence pointing to Rodney. ” The question presented is: When assessing trial counsel’s performance, did the Eighth Circuit fail to consider the totality of evidence from counsel’s perspective at the time? 3. The Eighth Circuit held that the Arkansas Supreme Court reasonably adjudicated the merits of Rankin’s claim under Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002) , when, five years before Atkins’ issuance, the court credited an IQ score of 72 over an earlier IQ score of 66, determined that Rankin was not “mentally retarded” under state law, and rejected Rankin’s argument that the court should “‘reduce’ these scores by the possible three point mar gin of error or ‘average’ them together in some way.” Rankin v. Stat e, 948 S.W.2d 397, 404 (Ark. 1997). The Eighth Circuit also ruled that AEDPA bars any post -Atkins evidence. The question presented is: Should the Court hold this case pending its decision in Hamm v. Smith , No. 24 872, in which the Court is considering “w hether and how courts may consider the cumulative effect of multiple IQ scores in assessing an Atkins claim ”?