The Betrayal of a Friend’s False Testimony

A month later, while his friends were still in prison, Woodruff was called to testify before a grand jury. Detectives spoke to him beforehand, and in their subsequent reports, they claimed he gave them new details about the crime. According to a detective’s note, Woodruff said one of his friends suggested they all go to Fillmore Avenue that night, because “maybe someone at one of the bars cashed a check,” and two of them went to the Golden Nugget, after which they told the others about “an old white guy at the bar with money.” The teens allegedly “waited for the white man to cross Fillmore Avenue” and when he did, Gibson “hit the man in the head and face with the piece of pipe he had in his sleeve.”

When Woodruff was presented before the grand jury, he repeated some of these details. Timothy J. Drury, the lead prosecutor, was taking notes that day, and even he seems to have had doubts about the veracity of Woodruff’s testimony. Drury’s notes reveal that he was still considering two other suspects: Watson and another man. If they were guilty, it would mean, he wrote, using Woodruff’s nickname, that “Tony is lying.”

Walker and the three other friends couldn’t understand why Woodruff would tell lies that could send them to prison for decades. In March 1976, Walker wrote from prison to a friend that he did not know what was happening to Woodruff. Remembering that time, Walker recently told me, “We couldn’t believe it. How could he do something like that?” The four talked about what they “wanted to do to Tony, in that moment, for what he was doing to us.”

Woodruff described himself at the time as “calm and confused.” He never told his parents that he had given false testimony because, he said, “I didn’t know how to do it. I didn’t know how to communicate with them.” He told me that before he testified, Drury had shaped his story. When trying to imagine the details of the crime, the prosecutor would respond with indications such as “It couldn’t have happened like that. Well, maybe it happened like that.” (Drury has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in the matter.) Woodruff remembers thinking, about his predicament, “‘Man, I’ve gotten myself into some shit that I don’t know how to get out of.'” He added, “I should have just said, ‘You know what? I’m not doing anything. You do what you have to do.’ »

Instead, in 1977, he took the witness stand at four separate trials to testify against his four friends. Each time, he was presented as the only eyewitness to the crime. Defense attorneys pointed out inconsistencies in his statements and argued he was lying, with Boyd’s attorney saying the judge should throw out the indictment because Woodruff’s testimony was “uncorroborated” and “unbelievable.” Woodruff gave an incorrect time, date and location for the murder, the attorney noted; “He couldn’t identify the victim, he couldn’t identify the house.” Drury told jurors: “Look, if we had fed Woodruff stuff, you wouldn’t have this blithe idiot talking like him. He’d be a lot gentler.”

Drury added: “He’s a ghetto kid… He’s a snook. You saw him, he’s an idiot, an idiot.” But the prosecutor continued: “I ask you to believe it. » Walker, Gibson and Boyd were convicted of second-degree murder and sent to the state’s adult prison system. Martin, who was tried last, was acquitted. Martin’s lawyer later explained that a crime scene photo he had received was crucial to the acquittal but that he did not know whether other defense attorneys had received it. As he recalled, the photo showed a single set of footprints in the snow walking from the crime scene – proof, he argued, that there had been only one attacker.

Tyrone Woodruff photographed on January 11, 2026.