Richard Barge

On the night of the murder, Mr. Barge was at Vanessa Brown's apartment for Thanksgiving dinner. Vanessa, Ronnet, and Mantasia Brown all testified he was present — consistent, credible, and with no motive to fabricate.

Less than a month before, Mr. Barge was shot in the abdomen and had emergency surgery, including spinal damage — leaving him physically unable to flee as the shooter reportedly did. His medical records were never adequately presented to the jury.

The weapon was used in another crime while Mr. Barge was already incarcerated. Disclosed late by the prosecution, it was never properly investigated — and the person who used it had no connection to him.

Steven Goldsboro, the State's only eyewitness, has recanted multiple times, stating he never saw the shooter's face and that his identification was coerced by police. His first account — a masked shooter he couldn't identify — fits the physical evidence.

New evidence implicates Rakeem Green and Billy Ray Corbit. Green admitted being at the scene, and the victim had cooperated against the Corbit crew shortly before his death — a clear motive for retaliation the jury never heard.

Jamal Gibbs and Andre Munday, who testified Mr. Barge confessed, have since recanted or contradicted themselves. Gibbs received undisclosed money and housing; Munday admits he never actually spoke with Mr. Barge.

The State failed to disclose ballistics linking the murder weapon to another crime — evidence that could have supported a third-party defense — until just before trial.

The prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence: Goldsboro's informant status and benefits, Gibbs's informant history and benefits, and the third-party culpability and weapon-reuse evidence.

Investigator James Bruno showed Goldsboro a single photograph of Mr. Barge — violating Attorney General guidelines and tainting the identification at the center of the State's case.

The State relied on false or misleading testimony from Goldsboro, Gibbs, and Munday and failed to correct it, contrary to Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959).

Goldsboro's testimony conflicted with his prior statements and the physical evidence, and his recantations and admissions of coercion undercut it further.

Gibbs and Munday had long histories of cooperating for benefits; their accounts were inconsistent and contradicted by other evidence.

The bullet trajectory and the reuse of the weapon do not support the State's theory — and were never put before the jury.