# data[].attributes.body
This article covers the release of a wrongfully convicted, African American male, Johnathan Fleming of New York. 27 at the time of the conviction he had spent nearly 2 decades in jail for a crime he was innocent of. On August 15, 1989, Darryl Rush was gunned down outside the housing projects in Brooklyn, Fleming was later accused and convicted of committing this crime. 25 years later his attorney Taylor Koss questions how the investigators withheld evidence that would have prevented Johnathan from going to jail. The differing facts between the cases are that in the case of James Montgomery the States Attorney was ruling to prevent retaliation from the KKK whereas in Johnathan Flemings case the city police and district attorney denied having this evidence and therefore it was never presented to the jury. With Flemings new defense team headed by Koss, they were able to uncover this record and get the conviction overturned. Similar to Montgomery's case where Judge Igoe found his conviction "a sham" that was upheld with no real evidence. These cases show that even though African American's have gained certain rights, the dominate society can still take these away, with very little reason. These two cases being to show the injustices we have in our justice system. These cases, between the convictions, have a 65-year difference, this can only push forward the point that the black community still has less power than the predominately white community.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A New York man, freed Tuesday after spending more than two decades in state prison, would not have been convicted if vital evidence had not been withheld by investigators, the man's lawyer alleged.

"Where the hell was this evidence all these years, and why wasn't it turned over until 25 years later?" attorney Taylor Koss asked.

Jonathan Fleming, 51, was 27 years old when he was convicted of a murder that he insisted he did not commit. Now, 24 years later, he has been released from Washington Correctional Facility in Comstock, N.Y.

Brooklyn District Attorney Kenneth P. Thompson said in a press release Tuesday that his office was dismissing murder charges against Fleming following a re-examination of his case by the office's Conviction Review Unit. Thompson said he made his decision based on "key alibi facts."

Koss, along with attorney Anthony Mayol and a team from the private investigative firm Management Resources, had spent the past year collecting evidence to prove Fleming's innocence.

According to Koss, it was recently discovered that two vital pieces of evidence had been kept from Fleming's original defense team. That evidence, Koss said, shows that Fleming was in Orlando, Fla., on Aug. 15, 1989, the day Darryl Rush was gunned down outside a Brooklyn housing project.

"He told his attorney he had in his pocket at the time of his arrest a phone receipt from paying a phone bill at [a Florida] hotel late in the evening of Aug 14, 1989," said Koss.

"The receipt was pretty strong alibi evidence," Koss continued. "His attorney went to the district attorney's office and asked for the receipt, and they said they did not have it. The police detectives also denied ever recovering the phone receipt. Fast-forward 25 years and the case file is opened again, and there is the phone receipt."

The receipt shows that Fleming paid a phone bill at an Orlando hotel at 9:30 p.m. on Aug. 14, 1989 -- roughly four hours before Rush's slaying, Koss said.

That's not all.

"Additionally, a report from Orlando police was found in the file," Koss said. "[Orlando police], investigating it in Florida on behalf of New York investigators, said they found multiple employees at the hotel who saw Mr. Fleming. That was another great piece of evidence showing him in Florida on August 16."

Those two pieces of evidence, Koss argues, would have likely persuaded a jury not to convict Fleming of second-degree murder.

In his Tuesday press release, Thompson acknowledged that the hotel receipt would have corroborated Fleming's alibi. "Today's actions follow a careful and thorough review of this case, and based on key alibi facts that place Fleming in Florida at the time of the murder, I have decided to dismiss all charges against him in the interest of justice," Thompson said.

Aside from the most recent evidence in the case, Koss said there was other evidence presented at trial that should have persuaded the jury of Fleming's innocence.

When police questioned Fleming on Aug. 18, 1989 -- three days after the homicide -- he told them he had been vacationing in Florida with his family and had just returned. He provided police with the names of those family members, the name of his hotel and the stubs from the plane tickets.

"I explained to the Detectives that I could provide any and all pertinent information I could come up with to support my assertion that I was not in Brooklyn, New York or any of its surrounding counties several days before, during, or days after the murder of Mr. Rush," Fleming wrote in a 2010 statement that was posted on Causes.com.

But an eyewitness claimed that she was sitting next to a window in her house that night and saw Fleming shoot Rush. As a result, Fleming was officially charged with second-degree murder. He was found guilty the following year and sentenced to life in prison.

In the months that followed Fleming's trial, the eyewitness recanted her testimony, saying she had identified Fleming as the shooter in exchange for dismissal of an unrelated felony charge that she was facing. ''I was scared, nervous and on probation ... so I lied,'' the woman wrote in a signed affidavit.

The woman further alleged that she told investigators the truth prior to testifying at trial, but was threatened with arrest for perjury if she backed down.

The woman's recantation surfaced during Fleming's appeal hearing, but the judge let the jury verdict stand.

In addition to the evidence about Fleming -- both old and new -- Koss said they now believe they know who is responsible for the shooting.

"There are two new witnesses, one of which admits to being the getaway driver from the shooting," Koss said. "He has come forward and given a sworn statement. He said Mr. Fleming was not a part of this in any way, shape or form, and he has identified who he claims is the actual shooter."

Meanwhile, Fleming has a lot of adjusting to do, according to his attorney.

"He is very happy that this day has finally come, but it's an emotional day that's tempered by the realization that he had to suffer in a jail cell the last 24 years, knowing he was an innocent man," Koss said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wrongly Convicted Man's Attorney: 'Where The Hell Was This Evidence'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A New York man, freed Tuesday after spending more than two decades in state prison, would not have been convicted if vital evidence had not been withheld by investigators, the man's lawyer alleged. "Where the hell was this evidence all these years, and why wasn't it turned over until 25 years later?"

# data[].attributes.body
This short newspaper article came out about seven months after Crime Non-Existent, Trial ‘Sham’, Court Frees Negro After 26 Years. The same judge that was assigned to the rape case, Judge Igoe, is assigned to this case, involving parole and habeas corpus. Judge Igoe was not the original judge assigned to this case; Judge William J. Campbell reassigned the case to him. The reader should notice the outcome of this case and its parallel to the rape case. This Judge, in both cases, lets the man who was prosecuted go.  Ricca is free to go out of jail and so is Mr. Montgomery. This could show how this Judge was more sympathetic towards Negroes, even though he himself was white. These results could also show the shifting attitudes in this time period. Even though a majority of people were still prejudice towards African Americans, some people, even political figures, were fighting for equal rights for blacks, either by participating in protests with them or making judicial decisions in their favor.

# data[].attributes.body
James Montgomery's case is not just one of a failed judicial system, but also one of the threat of organized violence. Despite the fact Mamie Snow couldn't identify Montgomery as her assailant the day after she pointed him out in a lineup, Montgomery was still sent to prison, without using witnesses or arguing for his freedom. From January 9, 1924 until August 10, 1949, Montgomery sat in a Chicago prison because he was threatened to not provide the evidence needed for his acquittal. It would be expected that, if any other man was in this position, he would be able to bring witnesses and would have a plan for his case, regardless of his guilt or innocence. It took twenty-six years for the red flags to go up; it took Snow's death and autopsy to make people question how legitimate the conviction was.
We should also pay attention to what Montgomery's life was like before he was arrested. He owned property, was a loving husband, served in World War II, and had no previous record. This was an upstanding man, which may have played into the case. Someone like this, whether in the North or the South, would have some level of power, making him a target for racist whites and the organizations they were a part of.
Another issue also ties gender into the situation. While James Montgomery did not provide evidence against the accusation, no one examined Mamie Snow for the physical evidence. If they had, Montgomery wouldn't have had to wait in prison for twenty-six years. Nowadays, hospitals must complete rape kits and gather evidence in case the victim wishes to press charges. Snow made claims without that physical evidence. While rape is a serious accusation and should be taken as such, the only evidence highlighted in the article was Snow's testimony.
In addition to the lack of physical evidence (i.e. a rape kit or examination provided from a physician), we should also take note of the fact that Miss Snow is a single, sixty-two-year-old white woman (and therefore a virgin, since society would assume that a single woman at any age would be a virgin) and claimed that a black man raped her. This case used the white woman/black man relationship to create sympathy for Snow (a pure white woman whose virtue was attacked) and use the internal prejudices against Montgomery (a black brute with evil, sexual predation). This made it easier for the prosecution to win. This also continued the “good-for-nothing” stereotype that comes with being a black man, no matter what he had
Montgomery did not enter the court without a plan. The threat of violence played a large part in the trial. With the State Attorney in the KKK, there was a chance that protecting Montgomery's freedom would cost him his safety or even his life, so he did not fight the charges with witnesses. At least behind bars the KKK couldn't reach him. As a result, he lost twenty-six years of his life for a crime he never committed.
With all of this in mind, Judge Igoe had plenty of reason to believe that James Montgomery should be freed and that something dark went on during the original trial.