#239 Jason Flom with Johnny Berry

the charges were dropped. Within a few weeks, Johnny was inexplicably re arrested for the crime of which he had just been cleared, and while in juvenile detention, he met fifteen year old Tahed Lloyd, who admitted that he was one of the two attackers in the Jones killing, but when he wouldn't agree to clear Johnny's name, the two boys fought. Lloyd was later arrested on an unrelated charge, and a gun in his possession was linked to the

Jones murder. However, Lloyd mistakenly believed that Johnny had implicated him and his retribution, falsely named Johnny Berry as his accomplice and Jones's shooter. At trial. The shell Brooks's testimony was shaky at best, but with Lloyd's testimony, Johnny was convicted and sentenced to life without parole. Years later, Lloyd admitted his lies, but at a hearing when the prosecution threatened to charge Lloyd with perjury and retry him for

the murder, Lloyd refused to officially recant. It took a slew of Supreme Court rulings on juvenile life sentences and a review by Philadelphia's Conviction Integrity Unit to finally set Johnny Berry free after nearly twenty five long years behind bars. This is wrongful Conviction. Welcome back to Wrongful Conviction. I'm your host, Jason Flaman. This episode is probably gonna asked with your perceptions of justice. I mean, there are so

many things wrong with this case. You're gonna feel like you need a Cairo practice from your head spinning around. It's an incredible story of an incredible man named Johnny Berry, and it goes all the way to the United States Supreme Court decisions, to lying witnesses and a corrupt system that really ignored what should have been absolutely crystal clear from day one. So, without further ado, Johnny Barry, Welcome

to wrongful conviction. Thank you, Thank you very much. Jason. Yeah, I mean, I'm so sorry you're here because of what you had to go through, But I'm obviously on the flip side, I'm super happy that you're free and out and have been totally exonerated and vindicated and are now living your best life. So okay, what was your life like before all of this insanity? Growing up in Philadelphia's Philadelphia life was simple, was fun, um and the eldest

five children. My father was active member in the military. My mother was to stay at home mom. We were poor, definitely didn't have much, but what we did have was love, dedication to one another, and we did our best to make things work. It sounds like people living that kind of life all over the country, right, just struggling to get by day to day, but having good parents and

lots of love in the household. And so you were sixteen years old at the time of this horrible crime went on August Leonard Jones, who was seventy eight years old, and Michelle Brooks, who was just twenty seven. We're sitting in a van in the Parkside neighborhood of Philadelphia, when

two very young men approached the van. Right, one of them blocked the passenger side door from opening, preventing Michelle from getting out, and then the other one approached Mr Jones with a handgun and yelled at him to get out. But before he could even comply. Don't forget he was not a young guy, seven eight years old, he was shot and killed and then both of the men fled. And before we dive in to the investigation, it's important to note that you, Johnny, had had some brushes with

the law prior to this, Is that right, Yes? Unfortunately, Yeah, I was specifically involved with and I'm not proud of the summon of drugs and things of that nature. Right, So you weren't exactly acquired boy, But that also doesn't make you a murderer. And it is relevant though, because

it means that you were known to the police. And so as the investigation got under way, Michelle Brooks, the seven year old woman from the van, she described the man who had held her door shut and said he had a chip front tooth, and then police showed her a photographic lineup and from that lineup she picked you. And at that time you did have a slightly chip

front tooth, so police arrested you. But on August thirty one, Michelle Brooks games to the preliminary hearing, and when she saw you, she told police that you were not the person who had held the door shut. You're just not the guy. So naturally the charges were dismissed and you were free, and that should have been the end of it for you right there, you know, But a few weeks later you were re arrested for the same crime and sent back to juvie. So, Johnny, this is crazy, right,

I mean, phillis in. Do you have any idea why they re arrested you. I have a theory. It was a time period where in Philadelphia was being plagued with crime, and politicians and public officials were like their feet held to fire, like, hey, we gotta do something about this. I was a known individual to authorities. I was in the streets. I was involved with gang activity, so drugs, and I believe that the police specifically honed in on me.

They had me. They didn't have any other individual at that particular time, and they wanted me, and they was stuck on me. And that's why we don't have any or never came up with any type of evidence as to why I was re arrested. Yeah, I guess that's not completely out of the realm of possibilities. It was Philadelphia in the nineties, after all, when both crime and police miscon induct were just rampant. I mean, but what

happens next is even crazier. So there you are back in juvenile detention and you hear about a fifteen year old kid named Taihed Lloyd who had been in Julie an unrelated charge during your last short extent. Now he was still there and some guys, but it hadn't told you what he had said after you had left the

last time. Yeah, So I was incarcerated in the juvenile facility, and once there, the individuals who were there and had been introduced to me so to speak from my time prior, the whole thing was hey, what are you doing here? Why are you back? And I'm like, I have no idea. They say, okay, well, by the way, do you know this guy over here indicating Taihi Lloyd. And I'm like, no, I don't. I don't know him, never met him before, you know, what's up with him? They're like, hey, when

you left. He told us that he and his friend had committed the murder and not you, and that you really didn't do it. So, hearing that, I approached him and I was like, Hey, I'm hearing that you had something to do with this homicide that I'm here for. I didn't do it. You know I didn't do it. Can you help me with it? His exact words to me was, I know who did it. I didn't do it, but I'm not saying anything. And at that point I said, or you're not saying anything. Oh no, you brought this.

We got into a physical altercation. We started to fight, and the officers in that vicinity came and they broke the fight up, separated us, but we had bad blood between us from that point on because I was so bent on. Man, I'm in this freaking hellhole for something. You and your friend or whoever it was dead and I'm not supposed to be here. And do you remember,

did Lloyd have chip teeth? Like the witness Michelle Brooks had mentioned tyhe Lloyd had a very very identifiable two front chip teeth that could have actually taken the tip of your pinky finger and stuck it through that chip in front of his two teeth. Well, I don't know that anybody in your situation would have acted any differently. I mean, not every reason to be angry and to want to try to do what you could do in

that situation to extricate yourself. Right, And here's this guy who holds the key, and he's right in front of you. And then it actually turned in the complete opposite direction. What I'm talking about is Lloyd was arrested several months later and they found him in possession of a handgun

that was linked to the murder. Ballistics confirmed this, and he thought that you had implicated him because you had known that he had done it from the talk inside the prison, and so he went ahead and implicated you in the crime, almost like street justice or something like that. Right, And as happens in these cases time and time again, he agreed to plead guilty in exchange for a fifteen to thirty seven years since for a murder that he did commit. So he saved himself from a life sentence

and changed for lying and presenting false testimony against you. Well, now what happens next is predictable, right, You get charged with murder, robbery, conspiracy, and possessing instruments of crime. So now you're facing the worst imaginable scenario. What was going through your mind when you found out you were being charged with all these terrible crimes. When I realized that I was being charged for this murder and that he

was bearing testimony against me, I was horrified. I still remained optimistic that I was going to go to trial and beat the case because I didn't do it. And so let's go to the trial. So this is September. He had already spent the year in jail awaiting trial, right, and then Michelle Brooks. So Michelle Brooks, remember was the witness who was in this vehicle at the time of

the murder. Now, her testimony was conflicting and confusing. She identified you as the person who held the door shut during the robbery, but then she also identified you as the gunman, which of course they couldn't both be true. And she also said that she had told the police previously that you weren't involved in the crime, and then she restated that in her testimony. So if I'm on the jury, I'm going wait a minute, there's three totally

different stories here. But I think the nail in your conference, so to speak. Was that Lloyd testified saying that you and he had committed the crime. He knew full well who had committed the crime with him, and that guy, his actual co conspirator, remained on the streets as a result of them taking you in his place. So who was your attorney and did they mount any kind of a defense for you. My attorney at the time was Donald Michael Potova. I will say that he did his best.

He was quart appointed, overworked, underpaid, and he tried his best to save this young boy's life. And it was so much that he could have done with a so called co defendant who pointed the finger and said, hey, yeah, I was a part of this crime, but he'd done it with me. Give me a deal, you know. So predictably, you were convicted of murder, robbery, possessing instruments of a crime, and conspiracy and sentenced to life in prison without the

possibility of parole. What was that awful moment like when the jury came back in with the verdict. When I was convicted and they handed down that life sentence, tears came down my eyes like a baby. I looked back at my mother at the time I was living, and I cried because I couldn't believe that the system had felt my family and my community and me, And at

that point I just felt absolutely helpless. This episode is underwritten by a i G, a leading global insurance company, and by Accenture, a global professional services company with leading capabilities in digital, cloud and secure Working to reform the criminal justice system is a key pillar of the ai G pro Bono Program, which provides free legal services and other support to many nonprofit organizations and individuals most in need as part of Accenture's commitment to racial and civil justice.

Accenture's Legal Access Program provides pro bono legal services in partnership with more than forty organizations, bringing meaningful change to people and communities worldwide. When I first got the prison, they sent me to State Correctional Institution Gradiford. That place was like another world. I was eighteen at the time. When I first entered into Grade Afford. It was like hallways full of people, full of people like close jury loud, and I thought, who are all these people? Wow, there's

a lot of counselors that work here. Because I saw a very few people who had on the state issued clothing. Well, what it was were all inmates, and at that particular time we were allowed to wear our street clothing. So the hallways was filled with inmates or residents as I like to call up. At that time, president was a lot more ran by the residents, more so than it is now. At that time, the residents had more control over the institutions, and there was a lot more liberties,

more freedom. It was more volatile than it is now. But on the other hand, it had like a balance to the police. The residents kind of ran it, but they maintained a balance, so people didn't just do anything, you know, there were checks and balances if you've done something, you know. Ad ministration kind of worked hand to hand with some of the residents and we kind of figured it out. That didn't mean that some stuff didn't happen sometimes, but it was a lot more easier. And I'm telling you,

five or six seven years went by like nothing. So six seven years later, two thousand and two, after your convictions had already been upheld on appeal, you received a letter that must have rocked your world. Tell us about that. I received under the door and myself a recantation letter from tye Lord basically saying, hey, here's a long awaited piece of information that you've been waiting for. He wanted to come clean, wanted to clear my name, and so

he did that. He talked about the fact of him having known me prior to being incarcerated at the juvenile facility. He talked about his incentives or motive for lying, and he also saw it as a means to receive less time. And I do remember that he was pretty insistent on he wasn't recanting for me. He more so was concerned about my mother and things of that nature. So for me, it was like a bitter sweet sort of thing at the time because I was so elated. I was so

blown away by receiving that recantation. But at the same time, I was done with the loss of my mother. That was hard, you know, I don't really talk about that. Yeah, that's um it's hard to imagine being stuck inside and getting the worst news that you could get like that. And what a crazy whirlwind of events, right if you get that worst news and then you get this letter that you've probably been maybe not even allowing yourself to

hope would come, but it came. So this guy who had literally put you in prison for the rest of your life, not only sent this letter, but he also signed an after David under oath saying that he had falsely implicated you because he thought that you had told the prosecution about Lloyd admitting in the juvenile detention center that he had taken part of the crime. So then your lawyer, Robert Gamberg filed a post conviction petition for

a new trial and was granted the hearing. Now he had collected a significant amount of evidence to defend your innocence, like statements from two different people who are in the juvenile detention center back in ninety four who overheard Lloyd say that he was going to falsely accuse and implicate you. And this lawyer Gamberg obtained a statement from a prison inmate, Bryant Miles, who said that Russell Q. Wilson admitted that he and Lloyd had committed the crime and that Lloyd

was the gunman. Bengo, right, this is powerful stuff. This is where it takes a crazy turn. In two thousand seven, Lloyd was prepared to testify via a video conference, but

the prosecution had some dirty tricks. A d O a prosecutor threatened to charge Lloyd with perjury and retry him for the murder if he persisted in his recantation, and the judge conducting the hearing became concerned that Lloyd was opening himself up to a perjury prosecution, which he was, so he appointed a lawyer to represent Lloyd and continue the hearing. And then the prosecutor got just what they wanted, right the hearing resumed and to A thousand and eight.

But Lloyd took the Fifth Amendment and you were sent back to prison. What a freaking turn of events that is, and just how people understand if he had lost If they had gone and done what they said they were going to do and followed through on their threat, he could have gone back to prison for the rest of

his life. In ISTAD of fifteen thirty seven, am I right, yeah, because that was part of his agreement with the District Attorney's office, is that it turned out that he testified falsely, perjured testimony anything like that, the dealer is off the table and he would have been prosecuted to the full assistant of the law. But the problem with that is,

as I see the District Attorney's office in Pennsylvania. They have immunity, and so when they utilized his agreement as a threat to him, which it was, it takes away the power of the balance of justice and the scales of justice because now even though he wanted to do the right thing and tell the truth, he's concluded from doing that because it's like, hey, I'm not gonna go to jail and exchange for helping this guy to get out didn't leave him any real room to do the

right thing. And this is a concerning who were instrumental in seeing too that he planned the fifth Their feet aren't held to the fire or anything like that because they have immunity. Yeah, here's this guy, Lloyd, who finally found his moral compass or his some kind of courage to come forward and tell the truth. And the prosecutors like, nope, we don't want the truth. We're not interested in no kind of truth. We're happy the way things are. And

this takes us to February of two thousand eighteen. So now you've been in for twenty three years. Yeah, approximately, Yeah, And so there have been a number of Supreme Court decisions in the past couple of decades that have had a significant positive impact on juvenile justice, and I want to just break those down for a second. They include that.

Back in two thousand five Roper versus Simmons, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional for juveniles, and then into a thousand and ten with Grand versus Florida, the U. S. Supreme Court invalidated life without parole sentences for juveniles and non homicide incidents. In two thousand and twelve, in Miller versus Alabama, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that mandatory life without parole sentences imposed

on juveniles were unconstitutional in all cases. And then in two thousand and sixteen, in Montgomery versus Louisiana, the U. S. Supreme Court made the holding they made in Miller retroactive, and so due to that very ruling, you received a reduced sentence that made you immediately eligible for parole and common Pleas Court Judge Barbara McDermott's love her right, and Judge McDermott, if you're listening, we're sending you a big shout out and our respect for having done what you did.

It's important that we recognize when people in positions of power do what's good and right. So she noted that you could quote continue the fight on the street instead of in prison, and quote she met, of course, fight to prove your innocence. But in August fourteen eighteen, you finally came home. What was that like when you just walked out the door. Was there a big crowd to meet you? What did you do? Oh? Man, Well, at the time, there was one very significant, very special person there.

Didn't meet me, as my wife, she was right there, walked out with a box in my hand, gave her a big hook, and I kind of like trotted as fast as I could end the direction away from the prison because in my mind, I felt like, at any moment, they're going to say, hey, Johnny, listen, we made a mistake. Man, you gotta come back. So I wanted to get the hell out of it. She said, hey, man, you moved kind of quickly, and I'm like, well, you know, if you want to get with it, you better come on.

But yeah, man, for me, that moment was like a breath of fresh air and burning building. I felt like I had absolutely won. When I walked out those doors and I got in that car with those prison attire on and we drove down that route. Let's not forget that even though you were free, you were really free, right, you were still a convicted murderer and all the things that go with that. But in another good turn of events,

there was a new DA in town. His name was Larry Krasner, and Larry Krasner was a friend of mine and a great man. He had by this time established one of the most robust conviction integrity units, run by Patricia Cummings, in the country. And they reviewed your case and they found all the statements that corroborated your innocence. And so June, less than a year after you were freed, all the convictions were vacated and all the charges were dismissed.

How did that feel? Well? Let me start off first, boss saying to Patricia Cummins, phenomenal woman, and to Larry Krasner, shout out to them virtual hugs. I love those two individuals. I love the work that they are doing. I take my head off to them. On that particular day where I was exonerated. First, it took about maybe fifteen minutes. The judge said a few words. She told me I

was exonerated. I accepted it, and the court went on with its normal daily proceeding, and I'm like, wow, twenty three years and some change versus fifteen minutes, and I walked out of the courtroom a freeman. I just felt like I got me back. I have felt empowered, and I felt like I could then begin my new life.

And the a d a time. Gata actually told a judge McDermott that had the prosecution allowed Lloyd to testify at the post conviction hearing in two thousand and eight, without the threat of being prosecuted for perjury, you would have been granted a new trial. Those are powerful words that you don't hear often enough from people like him. Yep, I actually know him very well, very very decent person

with courage beyond description. So I'm glad that he has been in addition to that office and changing the trajectory of the way in which that office had been running for past thirty or some odd years. Amen to that as well. And so as many villains as there are in this story, it feels like there's almost an equal number of heroes, and I'm glad we're recognizing them here and now. And then in August of two nineteen, you file the federal civil rights laws. It's seeking damages from

the city of Philadelphia. And I have to say, in all the years I've been doing this work, one of the questions that I'm asked the most is people they always want to know that the person who was wrongfully convicted, like, surely they got compensation that millions of dollars and like an apology, right, And unfortunately that's not what happens in far too many of these cases. Actually, in the large majority of these cases, and yours is one of them. Am I right? Yeah, Actually, a lot of cases that

do not become successful on civil wrongful conviction suit. They just aren't successful, and it's a year after year process fighting tooth and now to be compensated. So Pennsylvania is one of the states that doesn't have a compensation statute, you know, and the Innocence Project has been leading the charge to pass compensation statutes and laws around the country. I think they're now thirty two or thirty three states

that have them. Even then, they vary widely, and some of them provide very very little no matter what you went through. But Pennsylvania doesn't have a law, and so you haven't received any compensation whatsoever for your twenty three years in prison. No civil lawsuits are still on the way, but as far as the state saying, hey, look, we apologize, we acknowledge you've been wrongfully convicted, and as a gesture of you being able to keep on your feet out here, no,

that hasn't happened. Well, listen, hopefully it's not too far off, and hopefully you will be successful in one of these civil suits, so you definitely deserve it. In the meantime, though, I'm happy to say that you have welcomed the baby boy into the world. Right, yep, my baby boy. His name is Yusuf. He's just turned to He's so advanced man and so smart. That's awesome. That's a beautiful scene. And you have a cleaning business now as well. Right.

I work alongside of another individual, and what we do is we can clean commercial and residential properties and then we also do cleanouts. So individuals want like debris and things like that moved and the sense of the dumpster and things like that. We do our best to provide that service. And so Johnny, for people who are listening out there, who are wanting to help, and we know

how expensive it is raising a little kid. Is there a way that people can reach out to you about your cleaning business if they're in the Philadelphia area, or to make a speech to help, you know, to help cover your expenses while you're waiting for what we hope will be a successful outcome of a civil case eventually. If there are a way for people to contact you, you can contact me directly. My email is my name backwards Barry Johnny eleven and eleven at gmail dot com.

All right, so if anyone can help, has the ability to help, and is willing to help, please go to the link in the bio. We're gonna have Johnny's contact info there to help Johnny and his family. Of course, now we have the part of our show that I love the most. I think our audience does too. We call it, of course, closing arguments. And Johnny, here's how

it works. It's very very simple. First of all, I thank you again for being here with us today courageously sharing your insane story and your experience in the service of others. And now I'm just gonna kick back, turn off my microphone and leave my headphones on, and of course leave your microphone on so you can share with us any other thoughts that you want to impart to our large and growing audience. Thank you for having me,

and I do appreciate being here. The one thing that I'm focusing on right now here in Pennsylvania is hopefully getting the legislatures to realize the importance of enacting a law which would allow for perole eligibility for people who are serving life sentences and deserve to see the parole board. I think it's important for a number of reasons. One because, to me, if you really do the numbers, it's cost efficient.

It costs about an upwards of maybe thirty seven to forty thousand dollars to house and inmate annually, and if the animate or resident is geriatric or in some other type of state where they need assistance, can run you up with some hundreds of thousands of dollars, So it's

cost efficient. Also, if you really look at these statistics, for an individual who has been commuted after serving a life sentence, or has been pardoned or has been released on parole, or some other type of situation like that, the recentivism break for that type of individual is less than one percent. So statistics have shown that these type of individuals. This class of people mostly do not re offend. The statistics show is less than one percent. So I

call on the legislature. I call on their constituents. It makes sense, man do the sensible thing, and that a legislation to say parole eligibility. That means an individual would have a chance to see the parole board and then leave it to the parole board to make that decision based on that individual's case and then also what that person has been done while in conto and I put that number and maybe twenty five years. So that's what I would say, Support a bill for parole eligibility. Thank

you for listening to Wrong for Conviction. I'd like to thank our production team Connor hall All, Justin Golden, Jeff Clyburne, and Kevin Wardis. With research by Lila Robinson. The music in this production was supplied by three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction, on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction Podcast, and on Twitter at Wrong Conviction, as well as at Lava for Good. On all three platforms, you can also follow

me on both TikTok and Instagram. At it's Jason flop Ralevul Conviction is the production of Lava for Good podcasts and association with Signal Company Number one