What to Know
- Wayne Martin was convicted of the double murder in 2010
- A letter to a judge from the Brooklyn DA's office admits his right to due process was violated, among other prosecutorial infractions
- He was freed Tuesday without bail
A Brooklyn man who was convicted of double murder in 2005 was released from prison without bail after allegations were made about prosecutorial misconduct in his case.
Wayne Martin walked out of a Brooklyn courtroom court free on Wednesday after his conviction in the deaths of two at a Brownsville tire store was thrown out last month. He had been serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole following the 2010 conviction.
Martin has always maintained his innocence, telling the I-Team in an exclusive interview earlier this week that he had nothing to do with the crime and "they just tailored something to fit me."
As he left court on Wednesday, he told this reporter that he just wanted to get home to his six children.
"I'm free, I appreciate everything you did for me, Ms. Wallace," he said. "But right now I have to go to my family and get my kids and all that."
It's the latest development in the stunning case of murder, misconduct and missing evidence, which was blasted open when Brooklyn District Attorney Ken Thompson's office sent a letter to the chief administrative judge saying the man's due process rights had been violated and key evidence that could have changed the outcome of the jury's verdict was not given to the defense ahead of the trial.
The exculpatory evidence included documents showing that two witnesses identified different suspects as the gunman.
The Brooklyn District Attorney's Office, which first learned the evidence hadn't been handed over in January, has not decided whether the case will be retried, but the office did not oppose Martin's release.
In a letter to the chief administrative judge earlier this year, the Brooklyn district attorney’s conviction review unit admits that Wayne Martin’s due process rights were violated and that crucial information that could have changed the outcome of the jury’s verdict was not turned over to the defense prior to trial.