Speaker 1: On October twenty sixth, nineteen ninety seven, a group of
Speaker 1: Philadelphia teenagers planned a robbery that took place the following
Speaker 1: night at a local Delhi. After closing up, the deli owner,
Speaker 1: mister John Sue Kang, was held up and fatally shot
Speaker 1: in front of the store. After canvassing the neighborhood, police
Speaker 1: were unable to find out who had pulled the trigger,
Speaker 1: but finding those who were part of the conspiracy was
Speaker 1: a much easier task. Those present at the October twenty
Speaker 1: sixth meeting were willing to testify against three neighborhood kids,
Speaker 1: one of whom was Tyree Wallace. Despite a wide age
Speaker 1: gap between Tyree and his co defendants, as well as
Speaker 1: multiple false testimonies exposed that trial, Tyree was sentenced to
Speaker 1: life without parole. But this is wrongful conviction. Wrongful conviction
Speaker 1: has always gave voice to innocent people in prison, and
Speaker 1: now we're expanding that voice to you. Call us at
Speaker 1: eight three three two O seven four six sixty six
Speaker 1: and tell us how these stories make you feel and
Speaker 1: what you've done to help the cause, even if it's
Speaker 1: something as simple as telling a friend or sharing on
Speaker 1: social media, and you might just hear yourself in a
Speaker 1: future episode call us eight three three two oh seven
Speaker 1: four six sixty six. Welcome back to ronfel Conviction, where
Speaker 1: another Philadelphia case has come to our attention, in which
Speaker 1: our guest, Tyree Wallace, was not tied to the October
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety seven crime scene. But when you're prosecuted for
Speaker 1: felony murder in the second degree, you don't have to be.
Speaker 1: And we'll look get into what that means in a minute,
Speaker 1: But first let me introduce Tyree, who's joining us from
Speaker 1: a Pennsylvania correctional facility, a place he doesn't belong in.
Speaker 1: He never belonged there. But Tyree, thank you for calling in.
Speaker 2: You're welcome, thank you for doing and.
Speaker 1: Here with us to help share this harrowing story. His attorney,
Speaker 1: David Perry, thanks for having me so, Tyree, you grew
Speaker 1: up in Philadelphia in the eighties and nineties.
Speaker 2: Right, yes, I did. I was born at Children's Hospital.
Speaker 2: My mother lived on Cleveland Street in South Philadelphia, but
Speaker 2: she had an alcohol addiction, and as a result of that,
Speaker 2: I bounced back and forth between she my father, sometimes
Speaker 2: my grandmother. But South Philadelphia. It was pleasant enough, but
Speaker 2: it was starting to go downhill a little bit based
Speaker 2: off of drugs in the community, but at its core
Speaker 2: was still good decent people. For the most part.
Speaker 3: What you had at that time is a war on drugs,
Speaker 3: aggressive policing, fear in the community about recidivism, some headline
Speaker 3: making situations that caused a bit of a pendulum swing
Speaker 3: to an extremely aggressive police and district attorney approach to
Speaker 3: crime in the city of Philadelphia in the late nineties,
Speaker 3: where a lot of people would say that there was
Speaker 3: more of an emphasis on clearing cases than there was
Speaker 3: on finding justice.
Speaker 1: And these are familiar touchdowns for the crack epidemic era
Speaker 1: and it's aftermath all throughout this country, with most citizens
Speaker 1: just barely surviving both the crime that emanated from this
Speaker 1: scourge as well as a police force that acted with impunity,
Speaker 1: and the communities pulled through on the strength of folks
Speaker 1: like the victim in this case, mister John Sukang Rest
Speaker 1: in peace.
Speaker 2: He was just the giant in our community. He ran
Speaker 2: the Salt and Peperative Deli on Seventeenth in Ellsworth and
Speaker 2: most of the other Korean American establishments in South Philly.
Speaker 2: They normally only hired other people from the Korean American community,
Speaker 2: with the John intentionally hired from the people who lived
Speaker 2: in South Philly. The store had a familiar feel as
Speaker 2: a result of that intentionality. But then you had a
Speaker 2: bunch of people with jobs who would not otherwise have
Speaker 2: them if not for mister John.
Speaker 1: But not everyone is a pillar of the community, like
Speaker 1: the armed young man or men potentially even boys who
Speaker 1: may or may not have conspired to rob mister John.
Speaker 1: As he closed up shop one night in the Salt
Speaker 1: and Pepper Deli.
Speaker 3: At that time of night, there is mister Kang working there,
Speaker 3: of course, and there is Levanne Griffin, the clerk. Levan
Speaker 3: Griffin talked of three individuals, perhaps including a woman, come
Speaker 3: in moments or minutes before the murder. They leave as
Speaker 3: they're closing up the shop as they would normally do.
Speaker 3: Mister Kang is holding a bag of money. Levan Griffin
Speaker 3: has already exited the store, heading towards home, and mister
Speaker 3: Kang heads towards his car. Levan Griffin hears a loud bang,
Speaker 3: turns around and sees mister Kang having fallen to the ground.
Speaker 3: Levan Griffin takes off running. There was never really any
Speaker 3: physical evidence. There's no DNA element to this case, and
Speaker 3: Levan Griffin spoke with detectives soon after this. Griffin could
Speaker 3: gives some statement about somebody shorter and more heavy set
Speaker 3: or chunkier than Tyree and also darker skinned. Lavan said,
Speaker 3: they told me the people who walked into the store
Speaker 3: right before closing were involved in the shooting, and I
Speaker 3: personally had no knowledge of this.
Speaker 1: We're really not sure where they got that information, considering
Speaker 1: that the loan witness had just told them that he'd
Speaker 1: only seen one shooter. Perhaps they were trying to get
Speaker 1: him to identify the people who had come into the
Speaker 1: store since he had actually seen them and could then
Speaker 1: serve as a reliable eyewitness regardless of if those folks
Speaker 1: were involved or not. Now we're really not sure of
Speaker 1: their motives other than the significant pressure on them to
Speaker 1: close this case.
Speaker 2: It was the absolute talk of the neighborhood, and I
Speaker 2: remember thinking clearly that they are going to absolutely bury
Speaker 2: somebody for this, and that would be justified. I'm like,
Speaker 2: who would do this to mister King?
Speaker 4: Right?
Speaker 2: The Korean American community was in an uproar, and rightfully so,
Speaker 2: about what happened to missus John Young's who came and
Speaker 2: they were demanding results. The officer, Charles Boyle and others
Speaker 2: and my cads decided that we're going to get a conviction.
Speaker 1: So the police began canvassing the neighborhood and putting pressure
Speaker 1: on a number of neighborhood kids. Raheem Shackelford, Matthew Corporu,
Speaker 1: James Davis, the first two of whom ended up becoming
Speaker 1: Tyree's co defendants.
Speaker 2: So I was from a block that was called nineteenth
Speaker 2: and eighty. All of these guys you just named were
Speaker 2: all guys from seventeenth Street. Now, while there's not a
Speaker 2: great distance, it was to rivaling communities that wouldn't have
Speaker 2: anything to do with each other. All of the guys
Speaker 2: again that you just named, were all fifteen year olds
Speaker 2: and fourteen year olds. I was nineteen years old. We
Speaker 2: weren't in the same social circles. We were from rivaling community.
Speaker 2: These we just did not interact.
Speaker 1: But there was one source from Tyree's social circle that
Speaker 1: helped the police link him with Raheem Shackelford and Matthew Corporal.
Speaker 2: An associate of mine at the time, Brian Brooks had
Speaker 2: a girlfriend named Tracy Drayton. Tracy's nephew was Matthew Corporal.
Speaker 2: On one occasion at Tracy Dreaton's house, I was introduced
Speaker 2: into Matthew Corporrew we shook Haynes never saw him again
Speaker 2: until I was on trial with him for a robbery.
Speaker 2: Howm is that?
Speaker 1: And the narrative eventually became Tyree and Brian attended a
Speaker 1: planning meeting with these fourteen year olds the day prior
Speaker 1: October twenty six, But no one is exactly sure of
Speaker 1: how this narrative came to be.
Speaker 3: I'm not exactly sure if I'll ever really know the
Speaker 3: order of events. I think there is a degree I
Speaker 3: suppose of going to the usual suspects, and I think
Speaker 3: one person pointed to another and it just sort of
Speaker 3: became what a lot of these guys have said is
Speaker 3: sort of any two will do. And when it got
Speaker 3: to a point where they found that had any two
Speaker 3: or in this case three, they could clear the case
Speaker 3: and sell it to the jury. But they sort of
Speaker 3: ricochet off of each other. They knew Brian Brooks was
Speaker 3: a bad actor because he had about four other robberies.
Speaker 1: Interestingly, while under investigation for those robberies, Brian Brooks was
Speaker 1: arrested just hours before this robbery homicide for an unrelated charge,
Speaker 1: allegedly with information to trade on So.
Speaker 3: At four point fifty pm he's in custody and they're
Speaker 3: interviewing him about the list of crimes. The murder takes
Speaker 3: place later that night. Now it's not like Brian says,
Speaker 3: I'm aware that something's going to go down tonight, So
Speaker 3: there's no foreshadowing by Brian Brooks. In December, when Brian
Speaker 3: Brooks is questioned by the police, he says he knows
Speaker 3: nothing about the murder. Brian Brooks's December and police statement
Speaker 3: is never written down. It's only ever talked about. But
Speaker 3: how do we know that it occurred? At least we
Speaker 3: believe it occurred because Brian Brooks would be questioned in
Speaker 3: a police statement which is written down in February of
Speaker 3: nineteen ninety eight, which basically begins with the police saying, Brian,
Speaker 3: you're here to talk to us on your own free will. Yes,
Speaker 3: it's about the murder of John King. Well, we interviewed
Speaker 3: you in December. You said you didn't know anything about it, right, Yes,
Speaker 3: that was a lie, right, Yes, why are you coming
Speaker 3: now to tell us what you know, Well, because there's
Speaker 3: a rumor going around that me and my brother had
Speaker 3: something to do with it, and I don't like that. However,
Speaker 3: the police knew that couldn't possibly have been plausible because
Speaker 3: they could have easily said, well, Brian, of course you
Speaker 3: had nothing to do with it. You were in custody.
Speaker 1: So even his alleged motive to come forward was incredible.
Speaker 1: In fact, Brooks had a much more credible motive for
Speaker 1: making this statement.
Speaker 2: Brian Brooks was a court for a whole host of
Speaker 2: arm robberies. Each arm robbery had assault and we shortages
Speaker 2: of takes to him, and Brian was facing two hundred
Speaker 2: to four hundred years and so Brian helped these officers
Speaker 2: in multiple different cases that he just didn't have knowledge about.
Speaker 2: He was just willing to say whatever needed to be
Speaker 2: said to take two hundred to four hundred years down
Speaker 2: to five years.
Speaker 3: Brian Brooks would go into excruciating detail about the planning
Speaker 3: of the murder. On the day before the murder that
Speaker 3: Tyree and others came by James Davis's house. They're talking
Speaker 3: all about this big plan for the following night, and
Speaker 3: if this is to be believed, the day of the murder,
Speaker 3: Brian is being questioned in custody, ostensibly about a variety
Speaker 3: of crimes. He's not trying to work that down by saying, well,
Speaker 3: I've got something for you. There's something going down tonight.
Speaker 3: He doesn't do that. Fast forward. Now it's February, and
Speaker 3: not only does he know everything, he knew it the
Speaker 3: day before it happened.
Speaker 1: Now, how is that? That's a good question now. By
Speaker 1: this time, James Davis also made a statement about them
Speaker 1: where he allegedly declined an invitation from Tyree Wallace and
Speaker 1: Raheem Shackleford to participate, that Matthew Corporal and Raheem Shackleford
Speaker 1: showed him a soft off shotgun shortly before the crime,
Speaker 1: and that Shackleford told him that they got one hundred
Speaker 1: dollars off mister King. In addition, Matthew Corporal admitted to
Speaker 1: being a lookout and implicated Shackleford and Tyree, and then
Speaker 1: the police went to Lvan Griffin with a photo array
Speaker 1: featuring Tyree, Corporal and Shackleford.
Speaker 3: And Lavan Griffin had his own issues and would later
Speaker 3: say that he was basically harassed by the police, and
Speaker 3: his testimony would later be a very weak and loose
Speaker 3: attempt to identify assailants. It was some loose reference to
Speaker 3: having a similar bust or a similar body because Levanne
Speaker 3: Griffin didn't see the shooting.
Speaker 1: All of this together was enough to charge Tyree Wallace,
Speaker 1: Matthew Corporal, and Raheem Shackleford with conspiracy to commit robbery
Speaker 1: and second degree felony murder, and Tyree was arrested on
Speaker 1: February twentieth, nineteen ninety eight.
Speaker 2: Yes, I was at my father's house in the phone ring.
Speaker 2: My father answered the phone upstairs. The ass was Tyrie there,
Speaker 2: and he calls down and says, Tyree cook up the
Speaker 2: phone and the front door gets kicked in.
Speaker 4: I get arrested once.
Speaker 2: I get there. I was being interviewed by Detective Charles Boyle,
Speaker 2: and again I'm nineteen years old. Nervous is on him,
Speaker 2: so I say to him, I said, listen, sir, you
Speaker 2: have the one person I had nothing to do with
Speaker 2: the grown. So he looked behind him and closed the door,
Speaker 2: turned around, looked me right in my eyes and said,
Speaker 2: you know what he said. I believe you said. I
Speaker 2: don't give a fuck.
Speaker 1: You're listening to ron for conviction. You can listen to
Speaker 1: this all the Lava for Good podcasts one week early
Speaker 1: and ad free by subscribing to Lava for Good Plus
Speaker 1: on Apple Podcasts.
Speaker 2: In the commission of a felony, if anybody has killed
Speaker 2: everybody involved in that conspiracy, it receives a life sentence.
Speaker 2: So what people like Charles Boyle has been able to
Speaker 2: do is to weaponize that law. So he wasn't guessing
Speaker 2: this was a blueprint that he was so confident that
Speaker 2: he was just willing to reveal it to me. He said,
Speaker 2: let me tell you what the rest of your life
Speaker 2: is going to look like. You're gonna spend the next
Speaker 2: two years at CFCF then you're gonna get convicted of
Speaker 2: second degree murder. They never had to accuse me of
Speaker 2: killing mister King. They never had to accuse anyone of
Speaker 2: killing mister King. All they had to do was convince
Speaker 2: a jury that these three young black men who didn't
Speaker 2: know each other, we're in a conspiracy to roy mister King,
Speaker 2: and as a result of that, he died and everybody
Speaker 2: gets a life sentence.
Speaker 3: Rahim Shaka Ford says that when he goes into a
Speaker 3: courtroom for the first time to see Tyree, he says
Speaker 3: who's that guy?
Speaker 1: And as Tyree said earlier, he had only met Matthew
Speaker 1: Karprou once in passing. Nevertheless, just like detective Boil predicted,
Speaker 1: Tyree awaited trial for nearly two years and he was
Speaker 1: tried along with his co defendants in October nineteen ninety nine.
Speaker 2: So I did have a quarter pointed attorney, Daniel Green,
Speaker 2: and in retrospect, having some standing of how the system
Speaker 2: works when you think about the fact that the courts
Speaker 2: are in business and the de's are in business of
Speaker 2: punishing crime, of getting convictions. So when they are appointing
Speaker 2: you a coin appointed attorney, your immediate thought and this
Speaker 2: person is here to save the day, and that's not
Speaker 2: necessarily the case. This person is here to meet the
Speaker 2: standard of right he or she he had representation, and
Speaker 2: a lot of times they are there to help facilitate
Speaker 2: this process. And nothing stood out more to me than
Speaker 2: during the trial when my father said he came into
Speaker 2: a courtroom and Daniel Green and Evan Luiz, who was
Speaker 2: the discrease fired eighty A in my case, were just
Speaker 2: like just chumming it up. So my father went in,
Speaker 2: put the money together to get a paid attorney, put
Speaker 2: in a motion to have this attorney come on. This
Speaker 2: was two days before trial, and the judge said, well, listen,
Speaker 2: I can't stop you from bringing in a paid attorney,
Speaker 2: but I am not postponing this trialdy. So the attorney
Speaker 2: has two days to learn his keys.
Speaker 1: So they stuck with Daniel Green, and it appears that
Speaker 1: every state's witness was coerced and or incentivized.
Speaker 3: The narrative in the theory of the crime is that
Speaker 3: shackle Ford and Tyree Wallace accost Kang, shoot him take
Speaker 3: his money, with corporal present as a lookout, and Griffin
Speaker 3: hears it. He turns around quickly enough to see mister
Speaker 3: Kang slump onto the ground, and he takes off running scared.
Speaker 1: Remember, the state's narrative was that the assailants had entered
Speaker 1: the store before the crime. Now le Van Griffin was
Speaker 1: coerced into making IDs with the threat of his own charges.
Speaker 1: In addition, he had seen only one shooter, who he
Speaker 1: described as short, chubby, and dark skinned. Tyree is six ' too,
Speaker 1: slim and light skinned. Yet Griffin still id Shackelford and Tyree,
Speaker 1: so Tyree's lawyer was able to impeach Griffin on cross He.
Speaker 2: Read the description though, and as you pointed out, I
Speaker 2: was the polar opposite not only height but weight, skin color.
Speaker 2: Danny Green asked Levan Griffin directly, are you saying that
Speaker 2: my client is the person that came into the store.
Speaker 2: His response is, no, he fit the description. So my
Speaker 2: lawyer said, listen, you're honor, please tell him to stop
Speaker 2: singing it and just answer my question. So my lawyer
Speaker 2: asked him again, are you saying that he's the person
Speaker 2: who came into the store. He's saying, no, he fit
Speaker 2: the description. So he said, you're honor, please make him
Speaker 2: stop saying that. So the court stipulates that this was
Speaker 2: not an identification, that it was something lesser.
Speaker 1: Dan, You had Matthew Corporu, who claimed to be a lookout,
Speaker 1: but his statement presented a familiar constitutional issue. Corporal has
Speaker 1: his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination, and conversely, his
Speaker 1: co defendants have the right to confront their accuser. So
Speaker 1: to satisfy everyone's rights, they had a redacted version of
Speaker 1: Corporal's statement read into the record.
Speaker 2: They put Charles Boyle on the stain who read his
Speaker 2: statement into evidence, where he would say, me and two
Speaker 2: guys planned to do this robbery. So it's three people
Speaker 2: in proud He's saying, me and two guys. The fact
Speaker 2: that this detective is reading this into the evidence gives
Speaker 2: it validity.
Speaker 1: And even though Tyree and Shackle for his names were
Speaker 1: carefully left out, Levang had made his identification. However, impeachd
Speaker 1: may have been and remember to convict them of conspiracy
Speaker 1: and second degree fellowing murder. They didn't have to prove
Speaker 1: who killed mister King.
Speaker 4: I didn't realize that the DA wasn't even trying to
Speaker 4: prove a legitimate connection between me and the scene. She
Speaker 4: was only trying to convince these twelve people that these
Speaker 4: three young black men were in a conspiracy to rob
Speaker 4: mister King. Now that was not true, obviously, but that's
Speaker 4: a much lower standard.
Speaker 1: So they heard testimony about the October twenty sixth planning meeting,
Speaker 1: starting with James Davis and his mother Sonya Godfrey.
Speaker 3: His mother, I think lied on the stand about time
Speaker 3: of day and what she said. When she turns out
Speaker 3: she was at work and wasn't even home, and so
Speaker 3: she was caught in her lie. It sort of smelled
Speaker 3: like an effort to shield James Davis from being sucked
Speaker 3: into this whole thing, and it sounds like it worked.
Speaker 4: When she was court in Alie, she said that they
Speaker 4: made her say it. She didn't want to see it. Then,
Speaker 4: when her son undercrossed examination, said that the police harassed him,
Speaker 4: that they brought him and his mother to the station
Speaker 4: three or four.
Speaker 3: Times for whatever reasons. James Davis never became engulfed in
Speaker 3: the police's efforts back then, but there's seemingly a pretty
Speaker 3: consistent chorus of people who are incredulous of what James
Speaker 3: Davis had to say.
Speaker 1: James Davis said that at the planning meeting, Shackelford and
Speaker 1: Tyree asked him to participate, but he declined, and then
Speaker 1: Shackelford and Corporu showed him a shot off shotgun prior
Speaker 1: to the crime and after the fact told him that
Speaker 1: they only got one hundred dollars from mister King. And
Speaker 1: then Brian Brooks also claimed to have witnessed the meeting
Speaker 1: and that after the crime, Tyree told him that Shackelford
Speaker 1: was the shooter.
Speaker 3: Brian tells this story and then after he's finished giving
Speaker 3: his testimony, he goes back to the holding area of
Speaker 3: the courtroom and he turns to Sheriff John Hamilton and
Speaker 3: he says to the sh sheriff, Hey, Sheriff, what's the
Speaker 3: penalty for perjury? And the sheriff says a three to
Speaker 3: five years.
Speaker 2: Why.
Speaker 3: It's like, well, I just lied up there. They made
Speaker 3: me say that. So the sheriff goes and reveals to
Speaker 3: the judge what this witness has just said to him
Speaker 3: within minutes of testifying. In this case, there would be
Speaker 3: some delay there. The sheriff told me that. As that
Speaker 3: was all unfolding, some of the other police around actually
Speaker 3: said to the sheriff like, what are you an inmate lover?
Speaker 1: An inmate lover?
Speaker 3: It was clearly very revealing about the culture in which
Speaker 3: a lot of these guys operated, and Sheriff Hamilton was like, no,
Speaker 3: I know right from wrong. I have to tell the court.
Speaker 3: So they brought the sheriff on the stand. They brought
Speaker 3: Brian Brooks back on the stand, and that's when the
Speaker 3: Assistant DA basically said to Brian Brooks, hold on a minute,
Speaker 3: what happens to people who tell on other people in prison?
Speaker 4: What are they?
Speaker 3: They're snitches? So you're just really worried about being a snitch, right,
Speaker 3: Your testimony was accurate.
Speaker 4: Realized that the DA did a lot of things in
Speaker 4: that trial that she wasn't supposed to do as a prosecutor.
Speaker 4: But now I understand the purpose of it. The way
Speaker 4: she was able to explain Brian Brooks's recantation was just
Speaker 4: not true. But she did these things over and over again.
Speaker 4: She had a pattern in practice. So I need people
Speaker 4: to understand DH they have immunity for doing anything. They
Speaker 4: have to be seriously corrupt in order to get fired,
Speaker 4: and she wound up being fired.
Speaker 1: But that was many years after it would have done
Speaker 1: Tyree any good. Meanwhile, the attorneys for all three were
Speaker 1: able to expose inconsistencies and falsehoods from Levon Griffin, James Davis,
Speaker 1: and Sonia Godfrey, followed by Brian Brooks's in court recantation,
Speaker 1: and then Tyree's alibi. Witnesses told the jury where he
Speaker 1: was that night.
Speaker 3: He was at Damon Milligan's house with Damon Milligan's mother
Speaker 3: and girlfriend. But this house that they used to hang
Speaker 3: out with was a bit of a party, not exactly
Speaker 3: the most credible witness to put in front of a jury.
Speaker 3: They were easily discredited by the DA's office. So the
Speaker 3: alibi just sort of frittered away.
Speaker 1: It also didn't clear him from the October twenty sixth meeting.
Speaker 3: There was another witness who would never be called Jonathan Muldrew.
Speaker 3: Mouldrew had gone down and spoken to either the DA
Speaker 3: or Summon in the office and he actually expected to
Speaker 3: be somehow called as a witness by the prosecution. Muldrow
Speaker 3: was at James Davis home where this supposed the planning
Speaker 3: session took place, and Muldrow was like, no, I'll tell
Speaker 3: you the truth, and who was there and who wasn't there.
Speaker 3: Muldrow professes Tyree's innocence and complete uninvolvement. Tyree's lawyer tried
Speaker 3: to get Muldrow to come testify, and Muldrow was in
Speaker 3: the hospital, and there's an exchange where the judge says, look,
Speaker 3: i'll help you help, I'll serve a subpoena, will get
Speaker 3: him to the court if you need him testify, and
Speaker 3: they just gave.
Speaker 1: Up, just gave up on the independent witness who could
Speaker 1: have destroyed the planning meeting evidence, so that left only
Speaker 1: his alibi witnesses against cor Pru's redacted statement. The Van
Speaker 1: Griffins lesser than id supported by the parade of discredited
Speaker 1: state's witnesses.
Speaker 4: To me and the people who supported me, it seemed
Speaker 4: like an absolute no brainer. When people are being court
Speaker 4: and lies, when people were saying they didn't want to say,
Speaker 4: the DA made me saying when people are recanting like
Speaker 4: at Troud, this stuff is happening, you know what I mean.
Speaker 4: On top of the mindset that I can't be found
Speaker 4: guilty for something that didn't new, so I was almost
Speaker 4: certain that I was going to be found not guilty.
Speaker 1: But remember the standard was much lower. They just needed
Speaker 1: to get the jury to believe that these guys must
Speaker 1: have been involved in some way and the events that
Speaker 1: led to robbery and the resulting death, whether that was planning,
Speaker 1: actually robbing and shooting mister King, or even merely just
Speaker 1: being a lookout. When there appeared to be doubts about
Speaker 1: Corporal's guilt.
Speaker 3: I think there was at least a jury question or
Speaker 3: note that had been passed, and they gave the prosecution
Speaker 3: a little bit of nervousness about getting a conviction on Corporal.
Speaker 3: So for whatever reason or for those reasons, they would
Speaker 3: strike a deal with Corporal before the verdict would come
Speaker 3: down on shackle Ford.
Speaker 1: And Wallace, so corporal was not included in the verdict
Speaker 1: that led to life imprisonment for both Raheem Shackelford and
Speaker 1: Tyree Wallace.
Speaker 4: My mindset was that I couldn't be found guilty because
Speaker 4: I didn't do it like I genuinely absolutely believe that right.
Speaker 4: So of course that afforded hope, right, but then they
Speaker 4: read the verdict and the verdict was guilty. It's hard
Speaker 4: for me to put in words how that felt. It
Speaker 4: was disbelief. It was not understanding. As soon as they
Speaker 4: gave me the opportunity, I spoke out immediately at trial
Speaker 4: and said, you're honor I did not commit this crime.
Speaker 4: It wasn't viewed as someone wh didn't commit the crime
Speaker 4: fighting for their life right, which is what it was.
Speaker 4: It was viewed as this convicted murderer being disruptive. So
Speaker 4: after I was sentenced to life, then I wasn't shipped upstate.
Speaker 4: It was absolutely what you think prison is supposed to
Speaker 4: be like. It was extremely violent, it was extremely sexually violent.
Speaker 4: That was my first encounter with Central Pennsylvania CEOs and
Speaker 4: how they don't like people from Philly, how they particularly
Speaker 4: don't like black men and It's my first time ever
Speaker 4: encountering this type of energy. Right, It's like this stain
Speaker 4: for me, for people who don't know me, there was
Speaker 4: a violent energy. Now, Fortunately the neighborhood that I come
Speaker 4: from South Philadelphia had a strong presence in the institution.
Speaker 4: I went right into that fold. But then I immediately
Speaker 4: switched my mind to all right, I have to fight this,
Speaker 4: and I got introduced to the law library and really
Speaker 4: got focused on learning. But I saw at a really
Speaker 4: quick face that this is language that is created by
Speaker 4: this system. These are rules that are created by this system.
Speaker 4: And then the people who want to keep you in prison,
Speaker 4: they are the arbiter of whether you are successful or not.
Speaker 1: His initial appeals were denied, as was his first post
Speaker 1: conviction motion or but it's known as a PCRA in
Speaker 1: two thousand and two, which was based on an effective
Speaker 1: Assistance of Council, while Tyree filed successive pcras. Matthew Corporal
Speaker 1: swore an affid David for Raheem Shakle for his attorney
Speaker 1: in two thousand and seven, saying that he alone committed
Speaker 1: the robbery homicide which Tyree only heard about in two
Speaker 1: thousand and nine, but in finally a new PCRA based
Speaker 1: on that affid David. The state presented paperwork stating that
Speaker 1: Corporal was mentally ill and requested a psychologist to demonstrate
Speaker 1: what they had known at the time of trial.
Speaker 2: Corporu was clinically insane at the time of fron the
Speaker 2: major depression, bipolar schizophrenia, and projection issues, and it dates
Speaker 2: back to when he was a child. The only reason
Speaker 2: I know this is because I had access to his
Speaker 2: records as a result of the competency here. So they
Speaker 2: knew this about this man and still took a statement
Speaker 2: from him.
Speaker 1: Obviously, the PCRA was denied, but corproof should have never
Speaker 1: been relied on in the first place. Then, in twenty thirteen,
Speaker 1: the Pennsylvania Innists Project signed on to Tyree's case and
Speaker 1: they unearthed much of the exculpatory evidence that you've heard today.
Speaker 4: Their private investigator went out, combed the community, spoke to
Speaker 4: Van Griffin. He wanted to come forward, Rashie Grant, same thing,
Speaker 4: Ricky Wilson, same thing, on and on and on and
Speaker 4: on and on. There is all of this evidence.
Speaker 1: Le Van Griffin said that police threatened him with his
Speaker 1: own charges if he didn't say exactly what they wanted
Speaker 1: him to say. Rachid Grant and Ricky Wilson said the
Speaker 1: same thing that John muldro had said. Tyree was not
Speaker 1: at the October twenty six planning meeting at James Davis's house,
Speaker 1: and another PCIRA was filed.
Speaker 3: There was a moment there around twenty nineteen where it
Speaker 3: looked like witness interviews that with Muldrow and some other
Speaker 3: witnesses they were going to maybe get some assistance from
Speaker 3: the court. But Levne Griffin was supposed to show up.
Speaker 3: He didn't show up. And that was right before I
Speaker 3: got involved.
Speaker 1: And even though the Pennsylvania and this Is Project routinely
Speaker 1: reaches out to private council to help with cases, that's
Speaker 1: not how David got involved. I mean, after all, he's
Speaker 1: an intellectual property lawyer.
Speaker 4: So I started this movement here which was called main Up.
Speaker 4: In just a quick nutshell, how that happened. When I
Speaker 4: was seeing all of this gun violence on TV, it
Speaker 4: was really the only people that was standing up to
Speaker 4: it were the women in the community. So my thought
Speaker 4: process was like, where are the men? So I said,
Speaker 4: what can I do about it? In here? And I
Speaker 4: knew that a lot of the young guys who were
Speaker 4: here would be back in the outside. So I wanted
Speaker 4: to create a movement of men understanding what it was
Speaker 4: to be a man, what that meant for yourself, for
Speaker 4: your family, and your community. And we created this movement
Speaker 4: called Man Up. So every week we would have four
Speaker 4: hundred and fifty men. We had to turn away hundreds
Speaker 4: of people to get to the chapel every week, and
Speaker 4: the only thing that we were there for was to
Speaker 4: talk about being better men. Each week there would be
Speaker 4: a different topic. So if this week's topic was about
Speaker 4: community restoration, we would have five people, would act out
Speaker 4: a skit, somebody to do a song outside, guests come
Speaker 4: in and give speeches about community restoration. But then we
Speaker 4: would lay out plans for how we impact our community,
Speaker 4: which is how the Street Capin Initiative was born. Jobs
Speaker 4: came from this. My father one c three nonprofit organization,
Speaker 4: Man Up came as a result of this. We did
Speaker 4: street cleanings, we had a man Up hubs and different
Speaker 4: communities on the outside, so we did a lot of
Speaker 4: positive things based off of it.
Speaker 3: The program was being so well received that there were
Speaker 3: questions about replicating it at other prisons, so he had
Speaker 3: some intellectual property questions.
Speaker 4: So Dave came to see May and up it.
Speaker 3: Was an amazing almost revival like programs, and they would
Speaker 3: tackle topics like toxic masculinity or anchor management, or being
Speaker 3: a better father, or fiscal responsibility. And eventually, through probably
Speaker 3: some deat subliminal messaging from Tyree to me, you know,
Speaker 3: he wanted me to play that council role. And I
Speaker 3: sort of resisted it for quite a while because it
Speaker 3: was not my lane. But I eventually, with the support
Speaker 3: of my firm Blank Rom and then collaborating with Ker
Speaker 3: Bradford Gray and Kier having been the chief public defender
Speaker 3: in Montgomery County, having headed up the Defenders Association in Philadelphia,
Speaker 3: we became co counsel for Tyree.
Speaker 1: David and kir Bradford Gray continued down the same path
Speaker 1: as the Pennsylvania Innis's project, interviewing and reinterviewing witnesses.
Speaker 3: I mean, Brooks has told us Tyree's innocent. Shack of
Speaker 3: Ford has told us Tyree's innocent. Muldrew knows Tyree had
Speaker 3: nothing to do with it. Davis said as much.
Speaker 2: James Davis has since acknowledged it. I had no involvement
Speaker 2: in it that wasn't at his home.
Speaker 3: There's nobody in this entire chorus that says Tyree actually
Speaker 3: had anything to.
Speaker 4: Do with it.
Speaker 1: As we understand it, the chorus to whom David is
Speaker 1: referring has unanimously named an alternate suspect who may or
Speaker 1: may not have been one of the state's trial witnesses. Now,
Speaker 1: we're certainly not in the business of making accusations that
Speaker 1: might lead to another wrongful conviction, So we're going to
Speaker 1: refer to the chorus of state witnesses and others who
Speaker 1: proclaim Tyree's innocence.
Speaker 3: Levan Griffin knows that Tyree Wallace, I mean that how
Speaker 3: many more people. The sheriff, who sat in the courtroom,
Speaker 3: who has a pretty healthy experience of watching people testify,
Speaker 3: believes that Brian Brooks's recantation was actually the truth coming out.
Speaker 3: So the sheriff supports Tyree Wallace. The sheriff came up
Speaker 3: here and talked with us about it. He was shocked
Speaker 3: when he was contacted and found out that Tyree Wallace
Speaker 3: had been sitting in prison for years. He thought for
Speaker 3: sure there had been a mistrial after Brian Brooks's recantation.
Speaker 1: So David and Kir Bradford Gray filed another PCRA in
Speaker 1: which all of the witnesses at trial have either recanted
Speaker 1: or been discredited, and with the court's typical reluctance to
Speaker 1: admit wrongdoing and the goal of at least getting Tyree home,
Speaker 1: David and Keir got the court to agree to resentencing.
Speaker 3: Tyree's sentence was life without parole under second degree founy murder,
Speaker 3: and on June tenth, twenty twenty four, we got his
Speaker 3: life sentence vacated, having been sort of put into a
Speaker 3: position where he would end up pleading to conspiracy to
Speaker 3: commit murder three.
Speaker 4: So this unwillingness to truly be accountable for the ills
Speaker 4: of the system, that is another part that has to
Speaker 4: be confronted.
Speaker 1: So the fight to clear Tyree's name is not over.
Speaker 1: As far as his resentencing hearing on Monday, November fourth,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four, there were a number of possible outcomes,
Speaker 1: the worst one being twenty to forty years with parole eligibility.
Speaker 1: With optimism and anticipation, Tyree registered to vote, and we're
Speaker 1: happy to announce that he was released on time served
Speaker 1: and got a chance to vote for the very first
Speaker 1: time the following day. We're so happy for Tyree and
Speaker 1: his family, and again we hope for their continued success
Speaker 1: as they continue to fight his case. In the meantime,
Speaker 1: we're going to link a fundraiser for Tyree's re entry
Speaker 1: in the episode description, as he's not only going to
Speaker 1: need help to get by, but also to hit the
Speaker 1: ground running with the work he's been doing inside. And
Speaker 1: with that, we're going to go to closing arguments as
Speaker 1: we originally recorded them before this tremendous news.
Speaker 3: I'm optimistic that we're going to have justice for Tyree.
Speaker 3: He's the kind of voice that we should want in
Speaker 3: our community. I think anyone who meets him feels like
Speaker 3: it's a bit of a privilege to have crossed his
Speaker 3: path and hear what he has to say. So we're
Speaker 3: going to bring him home. I'm confident about that. But
Speaker 3: Tyree's fight won't end then. He still deserves to be
Speaker 3: fully exonerated. He's going to want support not only for
Speaker 3: himself personally to some degree, but Tyree is going to
Speaker 3: sort of set things alight, I think in terms of
Speaker 3: fighting for others, trying to change policy, and he's going
Speaker 3: to want people who are listening and who are set
Speaker 3: by his story or energized by it to join him,
Speaker 3: because it's going to take a whole chorus of people
Speaker 3: to make changes to the things that he faced so
Speaker 3: that he and others don't continue to have this happen.
Speaker 4: I am extremely grateful for the opportunity. Again, it is
Speaker 4: not acceptable that my name still be attached to the
Speaker 4: robbery and killing position Youngs who King. Once I am out,
Speaker 4: I am going to fight to make sure that my
Speaker 4: name is clear, that what happened to missus young Youngs
Speaker 4: who Cling is made clear. I want to do some
Speaker 4: things to honor his name and to respect his name
Speaker 4: and perpetuity. I am an open book. There are no
Speaker 4: questions that I do not want to ask or answered
Speaker 4: in Again, thank you for this opportunity.
Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. You can listen
Speaker 1: to this and all the Lava for Good podcasts one
Speaker 1: week early and ad free by subscribing to Lava for
Speaker 1: Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. I want to thank our
Speaker 1: production team, Connor Hall and Kathleen Fink, as well as
Speaker 1: my fellow executive producers Jeff Kempler, Kevin Wartis, and Jeff
Speaker 1: Cliber The music in this production was supplied by three
Speaker 1: time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow
Speaker 1: us across all social media platforms at Lava for Good
Speaker 1: and at Wrongful Conviction. You can also follow me on
Speaker 1: Instagram at It's Jason Flamm. Wrongful Conviction is the production
Speaker 1: of Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company
Speaker 1: Number One.
Speaker 4: We have worked hard to ensure that all facts reported
Speaker 4: in this show are accurate.
Speaker 3: The views and opinions expressed by the individuals featured in
Speaker 3: this show are their own and do not necessarily reflect
Speaker 3: those of LoVa for Good.