PUBLISHER'S NOTE: What do police informants have to do with forensic science? (I'm glad you asked). Investigative Reporter Pamela Colloff give us a clue when she writes - at the link below - "I’ve wanted to write about jailhouse informants for a long time because they often appear in troubled cases in which the other evidence is weak." That's my experience as will as a criminal lawyer and an observer of criminal justice. Given the reality that jurors - thanks to the CSI effect - are becoming more and more insistent on the need for there to be forensic evidence, it is becoming more and more common for police to rely on shady tactics such as use of police snitches, staging lineups, coercing, inducing, or creating false confessions out of thin air, procuring false eyewitness testimony or concealing exculpatory evidence.
-----------------------------------------------
QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Johnson (recanter) said that in 1997, he couldn’t testify how he wanted to. “I tried to tell the truth,” he said, “and they wouldn’t let me.”
----------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The case rested largely on two witnesses, Johnson and Barbara Marshall, who testified they saw Black fire the gun. Black’s attorney at the trial, Thomas Farquhar, was able to chip away at Marshall’s credibility, according to court filings. An investigator from his office testified in front of jurors that on the eve of the trial, Marshall provided him a signed statement recanting what she’d earlier told police.:
---------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: The attorneys arranged to have Johnson testify via video on July 28, 2025. He described Chow as a good friend of the whole neighborhood. “A very kind lady and good lady,” he recalled. He had less glowing words for Black. “We never liked each other,” he said. “He know it and I know it.” But his testimony that Black shot Chow, he said, was a lie he felt forced to say because a police officer threatened to lock him up. And this time, from the start, his recollections were different. Rather than being in a third-floor apartment, with a view of K Street, at the time of the shooting, he was in a courtyard behind the high-rise. “Being honest, we was out there drinking beer, and some of my friends was smoking marijuana. And we were just sitting out there kicking it, well, talking, as you would say,” he said."
---------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Johnson said they heard people arguing on K Street, followed by two booms, and he and his friends walked there to investigate. “What did you see on K Street?” Black’s attorney Amelia Maxfield asked “A bunch of polices,” he said. Johnson said he also saw Chow on the ground. Asked if he ever saw anyone fire a gun, Johnson said no. Under cross-examination, Assistant U.S. Attorney Shehzad Akhtar got Johnson to acknowledge that when he initially testified, he had agreed under oath to tell the truth, and that his memory about what happened was better in 1997 than in 2025. “Sir, it’s been 30 years. I can barely remember my name now,” Johnson said, according to a transcript. Johnson said that in 1997, he couldn’t testify how he wanted to.
“I tried to tell the truth,” he said, “and they wouldn’t let me.”
---------------------------------------------
STORY: "He served 26 years in prison. Then a key witness recanted," by Reporter Dan Simon, published by The Washington Post, on July. 25, 2026. (Washington Post staff writer Dan Morse covers courts and crime in Montgomery County, Md. He arrived at the paper in 2005, after reporting stops at the Wall Street Journal, Baltimore Sun and Montgomery (Ala.) Advertiser, where he was a Pulitzer Prize finalist. He is the author of "The Yoga Store Murder," published by Penguin. Honors and Awards: Pulitzer Prize finalist Books by Dan Morse: The Yoga Store MurderBuy this book)
SUB-HEADING: "David Black was 21 when he was charged with the murder of a beloved community member in D.C.’s Chinatown area. Now free, he is seeking exoneration."
GIST: "In 1997, the man’s testimony helped send David Black to prison for 26 years.
Last summer, inside the same Washington courthouse, Black listened as the witness recanted one key claim after another.
No, the man said, he never saw Black fire a gun. No, he never saw him flee. No, he never saw Black kill anyone.
“I had to leave the courtroom,” Black recalled in an interview this week. “My emotions wouldn’t hold.”
The recanted testimony is now central to Black’s legal fight to wipe out his murder conviction stemming from a shooting that shocked residents near D.C.’s Chinatown neighborhood.
Last summer, inside the same Washington courthouse, Black listened as the witness recanted one key claim after another.
No, the man said, he never saw Black fire a gun. No, he never saw him flee. No, he never saw Black kill anyone.
“I had to leave the courtroom,” Black recalled in an interview this week. “My emotions wouldn’t hold.”
The recanted testimony is now central to Black’s legal fight to wipe out his murder conviction stemming from a shooting that shocked residents near D.C.’s Chinatown neighborhood.
A beloved resident there, 78-year-old Alice Chow, was hit by a stray bullet as she walked home from church along K Street NW, dropping to the ground in the middle of a Sunday afternoon.
Black, 21 at the time, was arrested and went to trial. He did not testify, was found guilty by a jury and was imprisoned until he was 47.
“I just want to get exonerated and move on with my life,” the 50-year-old said.
His attorneys filed a 68-page motion last month seeking to vacate the conviction. “Mr. Black can finally prove what he has always maintained: that someone else fired the shot,” they wrote.
Their key witness in the effort was also a key witness for prosecutors in 1997: Larry Johnson. On July 28, 2025 — in the throes of Stage 4 lung cancer — Johnson recanted his earlier testimony, saying that police coerced him into giving false testimony.
Johnson died on Feb. 1, according to court filings and his obituary.
Black’s case illustrates how early-release programs enacted to help people convicted at a young age can offer only so much relief, especially if that person, as Black and his attorneys say, was innocent.
Black, 21 at the time, was arrested and went to trial. He did not testify, was found guilty by a jury and was imprisoned until he was 47.
“I just want to get exonerated and move on with my life,” the 50-year-old said.
His attorneys filed a 68-page motion last month seeking to vacate the conviction. “Mr. Black can finally prove what he has always maintained: that someone else fired the shot,” they wrote.
Their key witness in the effort was also a key witness for prosecutors in 1997: Larry Johnson. On July 28, 2025 — in the throes of Stage 4 lung cancer — Johnson recanted his earlier testimony, saying that police coerced him into giving false testimony.
Johnson died on Feb. 1, according to court filings and his obituary.
Black’s case illustrates how early-release programs enacted to help people convicted at a young age can offer only so much relief, especially if that person, as Black and his attorneys say, was innocent.
Black was originally sentenced to 52 years in prison.
In 2023, he used a law allowing people sentenced as young adults to seek early release.
He prevailed and was released after serving half his sentence.
But because his conviction remains, he said he struggles to find work and still carries the label of a murderer.
“The damage can never be undone,” he said. “Once I get exonerated, that’ll give me the opportunity to actually breathe.”
D.C. police said they do not discuss active legal disputes.
“The damage can never be undone,” he said. “Once I get exonerated, that’ll give me the opportunity to actually breathe.”
D.C. police said they do not discuss active legal disputes.
Officials at the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C., which prosecuted the case, declined to comment.
They are scheduled to file a legal response to Black’s request by Sept. 1. In earlier filings regarding Black’s early prison release, prosecutors wrote that he had failed to “to accept responsibility for his actions.”
Four law enforcement officers involved in the case in 1997 — two detectives, a police officer and a line prosecutor — declined to comment or could not be reached.
It was not clear from Johnson’s new testimony why he waited so long to recant his original testimony.
The victim, Chow, was a Washington-area native who spoke Cantonese, Mandarin and English.
Four law enforcement officers involved in the case in 1997 — two detectives, a police officer and a line prosecutor — declined to comment or could not be reached.
It was not clear from Johnson’s new testimony why he waited so long to recant his original testimony.
The victim, Chow, was a Washington-area native who spoke Cantonese, Mandarin and English.
She volunteered at a Chinese community center, translated documents for Chinese immigrants and delivered groceries to disabled neighbors.
Her murder occurred “at a time of increasing violence in D.C., resulting in tremendous pressure to solve her murder,” Black’s attorneys wrote in recent court papers.
Family and friends of Chow could not be reached. In court filings related to Black’s early-release request, in 2023, prosecutors said they were unable to reach Chow’s relatives.
At Black’s trial, prosecutors told jurors that he recklessly fired two gunshots as he chased a man they identified as James “June Bug” Smith down K Street after an argument.
Family and friends of Chow could not be reached. In court filings related to Black’s early-release request, in 2023, prosecutors said they were unable to reach Chow’s relatives.
At Black’s trial, prosecutors told jurors that he recklessly fired two gunshots as he chased a man they identified as James “June Bug” Smith down K Street after an argument.
Neither round hit the target, they said, but one struck Chow. T
The case rested largely on two witnesses, Johnson and Barbara Marshall, who testified they saw Black fire the gun.
Black’s attorney at the trial, Thomas Farquhar, was able to chip away at Marshall’s credibility, according to court filings. An investigator from his office testified in front of jurors that on the eve of the trial, Marshall provided him a signed statement recanting what she’d earlier told police.
Johnson testified that on the day of Chow’s murder, he was in a third-floor apartment drinking a beer and getting ready to watch the Pro Bowl when he heard a “ruckus outside.”
Johnson said he went to a hallway window for a better view and saw June Bug running away as Black fired two shots.
Farquhar argued that both witnesses were mistaken and that forensic evidence contradicted prosecutors’ claims of where the shots originated.
Farquhar argued that both witnesses were mistaken and that forensic evidence contradicted prosecutors’ claims of where the shots originated.
“This case is a nightmare,” he told jurors, “because he’s charged primarily on the basis of testimony of two witnesses that no reasonable person would believe.”
Jurors struggled in their deliberations, asking for explanations on reasonable doubt and witness credibility, and at one point said they were deadlocked, according to court records.
Jurors struggled in their deliberations, asking for explanations on reasonable doubt and witness credibility, and at one point said they were deadlocked, according to court records.
They came back for a second day of deliberations before reaching their decision.
Black remembered thinking their struggles were a good sign as he prepared to hear the verdict. “My knees buckled and I almost had a heart attack in the courtroom,” he recalled. “I could not believe it when I got convicted.”
In 2023 court filings, Black’s attorneys argued that understanding their client meant first understanding a childhood defined by trauma, chaos and heartbreak.
Black remembered thinking their struggles were a good sign as he prepared to hear the verdict. “My knees buckled and I almost had a heart attack in the courtroom,” he recalled. “I could not believe it when I got convicted.”
In 2023 court filings, Black’s attorneys argued that understanding their client meant first understanding a childhood defined by trauma, chaos and heartbreak.
He grew up in D.C.’s Sursum Corda neighborhood amid violence fueled by Washington’s crack epidemic of the late 1980s and 1990s.
Black was robbed at knifepoint when he was 10.
Five years later, his mother was killed after being shot nine times at a house party.Ask The Post AIDive deeper
“In this kind of environment, David really stood out as a calm guy,” Black’s attorney from the D.C. Public Defender Service wrote, citing a childhood friend.
The new legal filing is not Black’s first effort to get his conviction vacated.
“In this kind of environment, David really stood out as a calm guy,” Black’s attorney from the D.C. Public Defender Service wrote, citing a childhood friend.
The new legal filing is not Black’s first effort to get his conviction vacated.
Early in his prison sentence, he appealed the conviction to the D.C. Court of Appeals but failed to get it overturned.
The new effort, led by attorneys from the Exoneration Project, cites D.C.’s Innocence Protection Act, which requires a party to identify the “specific new evidence” to demonstrate they are “actually innocent despite having been convicted at trial.”
A judge can then order a conviction and the original charges be wiped out, thus ending the case, or grant a new trial.
The attorneys say previously undisclosed prosecution records point to an alternative suspect and undermine the eyewitness testimony.
They also tried to track down Johnson and Marshall, the two witnesses who said they saw Black fire the gun.
Marshall died in January 2025. But the signed statement she gave to the defense attorney investigator in 1997, according to court records, also amounts to a recanting of her claims against Black.
In the statement, Marshall said she was inside her apartment, heard two people arguing and looked out window, but only saw blurry images. “I was not wearing my glasses,” she said in the statement attached to court filings. “I couldn’t see who they were.”
She also said in the statement that she never saw a shooting but was harassed by the police into saying so: “All I wanted to do was go home.”
The attorneys arranged to have Johnson testify via video on July 28, 2025. He described Chow as a good friend of the whole neighborhood. “A very kind lady and good lady,” he recalled.
He had less glowing words for Black.
“We never liked each other,” he said. “He know it and I know it.”
But his testimony that Black shot Chow, he said, was a lie he felt forced to say because a police officer threatened to lock him up.
And this time, from the start, his recollections were different. Rather than being in a third-floor apartment, with a view of K Street, at the time of the shooting, he was in a courtyard behind the high-rise.
“Being honest, we was out there drinking beer, and some of my friends was smoking marijuana. And we were just sitting out there kicking it, well, talking, as you would say,” he said.
Johnson said they heard people arguing on K Street, followed by two booms, and he and his friends walked there to investigate.
“What did you see on K Street?” Black’s attorney Amelia Maxfield asked.
“A bunch of polices,” he said.
Johnson said he also saw Chow on the ground. Asked if he ever saw anyone fire a gun, Johnson said no.
Under cross-examination, Assistant U.S. Attorney Shehzad Akhtar got Johnson to acknowledge that when he initially testified, he had agreed under oath to tell the truth, and that his memory about what happened was better in 1997 than in 2025.
“Sir, it’s been 30 years. I can barely remember my name now,” Johnson said, according to a transcript.
Johnson said that in 1997, he couldn’t testify how he wanted to.
“I tried to tell the truth,” he said, “and they wouldn’t let me.”
Marshall died in January 2025. But the signed statement she gave to the defense attorney investigator in 1997, according to court records, also amounts to a recanting of her claims against Black.
In the statement, Marshall said she was inside her apartment, heard two people arguing and looked out window, but only saw blurry images. “I was not wearing my glasses,” she said in the statement attached to court filings. “I couldn’t see who they were.”
She also said in the statement that she never saw a shooting but was harassed by the police into saying so: “All I wanted to do was go home.”
The attorneys arranged to have Johnson testify via video on July 28, 2025. He described Chow as a good friend of the whole neighborhood. “A very kind lady and good lady,” he recalled.
He had less glowing words for Black.
“We never liked each other,” he said. “He know it and I know it.”
But his testimony that Black shot Chow, he said, was a lie he felt forced to say because a police officer threatened to lock him up.
And this time, from the start, his recollections were different. Rather than being in a third-floor apartment, with a view of K Street, at the time of the shooting, he was in a courtyard behind the high-rise.
“Being honest, we was out there drinking beer, and some of my friends was smoking marijuana. And we were just sitting out there kicking it, well, talking, as you would say,” he said.
Johnson said they heard people arguing on K Street, followed by two booms, and he and his friends walked there to investigate.
“What did you see on K Street?” Black’s attorney Amelia Maxfield asked.
“A bunch of polices,” he said.
Johnson said he also saw Chow on the ground. Asked if he ever saw anyone fire a gun, Johnson said no.
Under cross-examination, Assistant U.S. Attorney Shehzad Akhtar got Johnson to acknowledge that when he initially testified, he had agreed under oath to tell the truth, and that his memory about what happened was better in 1997 than in 2025.
“Sir, it’s been 30 years. I can barely remember my name now,” Johnson said, according to a transcript.
Johnson said that in 1997, he couldn’t testify how he wanted to.
“I tried to tell the truth,” he said, “and they wouldn’t let me.”
The entire story can be read at:
