JUNE 11, 1966

I was convicted of murder in Baton Rouge, Louisiana for the December 5, 1965 shooting death of a convenience store clerk during a botched robbery attempt. The verdict carried a mandatory death sentence. It took the jury less than 45 minutes to find me “guilty as charged.” It became known quite simply as “the Sinclair case”—one of the most politicized cases in the Louisiana justice system.

The official facts of the case from the beginning were manipulated, misrepresented and even manufactured to ensure that the pursued death penalty verdict would be return.

I did a recent Perplexity AI search with the simple query “newspaper article about the suppression of evidence in the Billy Wayne Sinclair case.” The following is a verbatim account of that AI search:

“Suppression of Favorable Evidence in the Billy Wayne Sinclair Murder Case

“Background

“Billy Wayne Sinclair was convicted of first-degree murder in Louisiana in 1965 and sentenced to death, later commuted to life imprisonment. His case became notable not only for his later work as a prison journalist and whistleblower but also for serious questions about the fairness of his original trial.

“Suppression of Favorable Evidence

“Key Allegations

“At Sinclair’s 1966 trial, the prosecution relied heavily on the testimony of two witnesses—a former state police officer and his wife—who claimed Sinclair shot the store clerk in the chest during a robbery and then calmly walked away. This narrative was central to establishing the specific intent required for a death penalty conviction under Louisiana law.

“However, four other witnesses gave sworn statements to police that contradicted the prosecution’s version. These witnesses said the clerk chased Sinclair out of the store, waving a broom, and that Sinclair fired a shot over his shoulder while fleeing. According to these statements, the fatal shot struck the clerk under the arm, not in the chest, and Sinclair had abandoned the robbery attempt.

“Crucially, these four witness statements were never disclosed to Sinclair’s defense attorney. The prosecutor sealed the police report containing these exculpatory statements, preventing the defense from using them at trial. Legal experts later concluded that if these witnesses had testified, the jury might have returned a manslaughter or non-capital verdict instead of first-degree murder.

“Discovery of Suppression

“The suppressed evidence came to light in 1979 when Sinclair’s mother, after a clemency denial, obtained documents from her son’s file at the Pardon Board. Among them was the official police report containing the four favorable witness statements. A lawyer for the board tried to stop her from taking the documents, but she managed to leave with them3.

“The Pardon Board chairman acknowledged that the board knew Sinclair’s crime was not a cold-blooded murder, and the suppressed police report was proof. Despite this, the prosecutor’s actions had already determined Sinclair’s fate at trial.

“Media Coverage and Impact

“For years, local media largely accepted the prosecution’s narrative, influenced by the social standing of the victim and the pressure exerted by a powerful local network. Even after the suppressed evidence was uncovered, it received little media attention at the time3.

“Sinclair’s later work as co-editor of The Angolite and his role as a whistleblower brought renewed scrutiny to his case, but the initial miscarriage of justice stemming from the suppression of favorable evidence had already had a profound impact on his life and legal prospects.

Conclusion

“The Billy Wayne Sinclair case is a stark example of how the suppression of exculpatory evidence and the use of perjured testimony can lead to a wrongful conviction and the imposition of the death penalty. Despite later revelations and advocacy, the damage done by the original trial’s unfairness persisted for decades.”

I spent 40 years, four months, and eleven days in the Louisiana prison system before being paroled in April 2006. I have been on parole for 19 years without a single blemish.

In 2020, the Louisiana Legislature passed a law that allows a parolee convicted of a violent offense to be placed in permanent "inactive status" (no longer under parole supervision) after seven years. The parole board, including the present one, has placed hundreds of parolees--including dozens convicted of murder in some incredibly horrific manner--in inactive status.

The previous parole board denied me inactive status several times. The current board just ignores my current request. The reason?

The executive director of the board recently told my wife that "the Sinclair case" is "problematic."

Nearly 60 years in the custody of the Louisiana penal system, in one form or another, and the case remains "problematic."

That's the true nature of Louisiana "justice."