CANTON, Ohio — 3News Investigates is digging into claims made by Frank Tyson's family that he was wrongfully imprisoned and improperly denied a new trial despite key witnesses allegedly recanting their stories.
Tyson had been released from prison just two weeks before his death while in the custody of Canton police. He had served a 24-year sentence for charges including grand theft auto and kidnapping.
"What is worse, the wrongful conviction or the wrongful death?" declared Ben Crump, a nationally known civil rights attorney who was with the Tyson family at a Thursday press conference. "Robbed of his liberty for 24 years, because of a racist, uncompassionate criminal justice system."
According to court documents obtained by 3News Investigates, Tyson was accused in 2000 of stealing a truck, fleeing from police, then going into a home and using one of the homeowners as a human shield. Tyson claimed that he was not the person involved and that law enforcement officers tried to frame him for the crime.
In Tyson's writ of habeas corpus (a court argument for wrongful imprisonment), he presented sworn affidavits from two key witnesses who allegedly recanted their stories and said prosecutors told them to lie.
"[They said,] 'I was under duress. I was forced to lie.' So we’re just going to overlook all of that?” Crump questioned.
However, Tyson's request for a new trial was made six years after the alleged recantations — well beyond what Ohio law allows. Under those laws, convicts have four months to request a new trial unless there is clear evidence that a delay was unavoidable.
However, a lower court ruled that the witness "recantations presented via affidavit lack credibility." Further, the court ruled that even if the recantations were credible, "there was sufficient significant evidence presented at trial to support the conclusion that Tyson committed the offenses charged."
Despite the rulings, the family says their mission is to prove Tyson's alleged wrongful death and clear his name.
"They talked about actual innocence, but it's not enough," Crump lamented, "because you were late in filing it."
The appellate court did not rule on the merits of the recantations, but denied Tyson's request for a new trial based on the timeliness of the filing and the lack of evidence that the delay was unavoidable. Crump blames a criminal justice system in which those who can't afford attorneys wind up with inadequate legal representation.
The Ohio Supreme Court declined to hear the case, citing a lack of a constitutional issue.