William J. Mayo moved from Cincinnati, Ohio, to Atlanta, Georgia so that he could pursue his dream of obtaining the finest possible college education at Morehouse College – which he attended on an Army ROTC Academic scholarship while working on his degree in psychology. Ironically, his minor was criminal justice.
William wanted to expose other young men to the world of opportunities he had obtained for himself. It was Williams’s belief at heart that he could help make a difference in the lives of young people through a mentoring program. In November of 1991, William drove two young men – Tyrone Wilson and Dale Thomas -- from Chicago to Atlanta for the Morehouse College homecoming weekend. It was William’s hope that the visit would demonstrate to the young men what college life was like, and that it would encourage them to seek a better life than what they were living in Chicago. They arrived in Atlanta on November 3, 1991.
That evening, around 7:15 to 7:30, William made a stop in Smyrna (a small town outside of Atlanta located in Cobb County) that would forever change his life.
William retrieved some clothing and personal items from an acquaintance who had stored them for him until he could return from Chicago to pick them up. The two young men accompanying William remained in the car while he picked up his belongings.
During the time William was as at the house, these two young men burglarized and robbed a home that was two doors away from the house were William was. According to many statements made by the men themselves, their intent was to go to the house where William was, rob him, and steal from anyone who would have been in the house. In a May 2004 interview with Atlanta’s WAOK, one of the two men (Wilson), repeated his often-made statement that he and Thomas had planned all along to steal from William, turning the trip into an easy crime spree.
Instead, they went to the wrong house. Having planned to commit crimes, however, Wilson and Thomas decided to make the most of the moment.
They terrorized a bi-racial, middle aged couple for about 10 to 20 minutes, tying them up with telephone cord before stealing jewelry and small items from the house. The duo was able to make it back to the car just before William returned with his belongings. William drove away without any knowledge that a crime had taken place. The car was pulled over upon entry onto the interstate by police officers with their guns drawn. William and the two young men were arrested, taken into custody and charged with burglary, armed robbery and aggravated assault.
Even though the victims initially reported seeing only two attackers, and though the young men themselves eventually stated in court appeal hearings that William had nothing to do with the robbery, William was slammed with two life sentences for armed robbery, and two 20-year sentences for the aggravated assault charges. The victims suffered no serious injuries during their attack.
How did this happen?
The sad fact is the innocent people get convicted all the time. According to the Innocence Project, a national nonprofit organization that has now overturned 144 death sentences based upon post-conviction evidence, a study of its first 70 cases reversed revealed that:
•More than 30 (42.85 percent) of them involved police misconduct which led to wrongful convictions.
•More than 30 of them involved prosecutorial misconduct.
•Approximately 15 of them (21.42 percent) involved false witness testimony.
William was the victim of all three.
The victims gave contradicting statements to police and in open court – sometimes saying there were two perpetrators and then saying three when corrected by the prosecution. Moreover, they could not identify William on the night of the incident though they did point him out to identify him five months later during the trial. Police, meanwhile, appear to have changed the “2” on the initial police report to a “3” (regarding the number of perpetrators) and made conflicting statements about what they found in the rental car. A judge at a suppression hearing also expressed concern about the county police department’s handling of the identification process. However, the method was allowed to stand due to the fact that William’s court appointed attorney did not pursue the issue. For its part, the prosecution – according to Thomas – coached Thomas and Wilson to incriminate William … which the codefendants and other witnesses complied with because they had criminal histories and/or outstanding warrants against them. The prosecution withheld information about its witnesses that could have been beneficial to William’s defense had it been known. No forensics were used for William’s conviction.
Due to no pre-trial investigations being conducted on William’s behalf – his only defense was testimony and documentation of his 25-years of superior character. William Mayo had no prior police run-ins or criminal history.
Posted By: Will Moss
Thursday, May 26th 2005 at 1:01PM
You can also
click
here to view all posts by this author...
