WRONGLY CONVICTED FOR $1,000 REWARD: In a Brooklyn, New York , murder case, two men, Anthony Faison, 35, and Charles Shepherd, 38, were convicted in 1987 in the murder of Jean Ulysses, a Haitian livery driver. Their conviction hinged on the testimony of a witness who later admitted she had lied to collect a $1,000 reward. The police arrested the man they now say was responsible for the killing, Arlet Cheston, who confessed to the crime. Faison and Shepherd were released, after 14 years in prison.

THREE MAIN FORMS OF REWARD FOR INFO LEADING TO CONVICTION: Rewards for information that leads to conviction in criminal cases primarily take three forms: 1) cash rewards for information and/or testimony leading to conviction and 2) other benefits, such as shorter sentences, release or immunity for jailhouse informants, accomplices or other interested parties. 3) “Whistle Blowers” often derive some benefit for releasing information that exposes criminal conduct, such as a 10%-50% “commission” to informants to the Internal Revenue Service.

PRIME EXAMPLE OF AFFECT ON TRIAL: Such rewards can and do affect the outcome of criminal prosecutions, often dramatically. In Los Angeles , the Mickey Thompson murder trial finally began in October of 2006, 5 years after the defendant, Michael F. Goodwin, was charged and 18 years after the brutal murders of Thompson and his wife Trudy.

NO WITNESSES UNTIL REWARD OFFERED - THEN DOZENS: In this case, no witnesses came forward to report “death threats” until 10 years after the crimes and following the announcement of a $1,000,000 reward in several national television programs. This is the largest reward posted in a criminal case in the U.S. Thompson's sister who vowed to see Goodwin convicted, in spite of the lack of evidence, posted the extraordinary reward.

MEGA-REWARD ANNOUNCED ON NUMEROUS NATIONAL TV PROGRAMS: The TV programs, featuring images of Goodwin and statements implicating him in the crimes, even though there was no evidence linking him to the crimes, generated hundreds of calls. The “leads' were fielded by the L.A. Sherriff's Department homicide detective, Mark Lillienfeld. Many witnesses testified against Goodwin because of the more than a dozen national airings.

2ND FILING A RESULT OF TV GENERATED "WITNESSES:"
Despite a dismissal of the Mickey Thompson murder charges against Goodwin in Orange County, L.A. authorities cited the “new evidence” generated from the $1 million reward, as their reason for filing charges against Goodwin in 2004.

$1 MILLION MEGA-REWARD IS UNPRECEDENTED: There are no comparisons, since the size of the reward in the Mickey Thompson murder prosecution is unprecedented. Although most of the prosecution witnesses admit seeing at least one of the TV programs announcing the reward in connection with Goodwin, none admits that the reward influenced their testimony.

ALL SUSPECTS DROPPED, EXCEPT GOODWIN : Goodwin is not charged with the actual shootings but as the person who hired the shooters to kill Thompson and his wife. Investigators now admit that the search for the actual killers was dropped and authorities concentrated on building a case against Goodwin.

MICKEY THOMPSON MURDER TRIAL MADE POSSIBLE BY REWARD: There can be no doubt that the $1 million mega-reward has dramatically affected the outcome of the Mickey Thompson murder trial. After 7 weeks, the trial ended on December 22nd. The jury has not yet returned a verdict.

WHY WOULD WITNESSES LIE AND RISK PERJURY : Because they can. There is no way to disprove what a witness says they think they saw/recall. There is no chance of prosecution for perjury for witness testimony of this kind. Also, the witnesses in a case like this, may believe they are simply helping to convict someone who is an extraordinarily evil person, as depicted by law enforcement, prosecutors and those driving the prosecution. Besides, they have been told that everyone else is testifying to these same facts and the evidence of guilt is overwhelming.

WILL THE JURY BELIEVE THE QUESTIONABLE WITNESSES? In the Brooklyn case, only $1,000 and the testimony of one witness led to the wrongful conviction of two men. With $1 million at stake and a dozen witnesses who will, apparently, have to divvy it up for their contribution, one wonders how affected the Thompson murder trial jury will be.