By Mrs. Eileen Hunter — about the author. Posted August 11, 2026.
In 1966, three people were shot to death at the Lafayette Bar and Grill in Paterson, New Jersey. The boxer Rubin “Hurricane” Carter and John Artis were convicted of the murders — twice — before a federal judge set the convictions aside in 1985. In 2001, three people were shot to death at 221 Greenwood Drive in Monroe, Louisiana, and Tony Hunter was convicted in 2004. The cases are separated by four decades and a thousand miles, and they are not identical. But the parallels are instructive — and so are the differences.
What the cases share
- A triple murder, and a Black defendant. Both men were convicted of three killings; both cases became entangled with questions of race in the justice system. When Judge H. Lee Sarokin vacated Carter’s conviction, he wrote that the prosecution had been “predicated upon an appeal to racism rather than reason, and concealment rather than disclosure.” Carter v. Rafferty, 621 F. Supp. 533 (D.N.J. 1985).
- A case standing on questionable witnesses. Carter’s convictions rested centrally on Alfred Bello and Arthur Bradley — petty criminals whose accounts shifted over the years, who recanted and re-recanted, and whose expectations of favorable treatment became a core issue. Mr. Hunter’s conviction rests on three jailhouse informants whose accounts contradicted each other and the record, and whose benefits are documented in the evidence files.
- Disclosure failures. In Carter’s case, the courts identified suppression of material bearing on the key witnesses’ credibility. In Mr. Hunter’s case, the filings allege five undisclosed matters — documented here — though no court has yet so found.
- The need for outside attention. Carter’s case moved when journalists, advocates and public figures — most famously Bob Dylan’s 1975 song “Hurricane” — forced sustained scrutiny. The lesson is uncomfortable but real: courts respond to records, and records get built when people are watching.
Where the cases differ — stated honestly
- Carter’s witnesses were not jailhouse informants. Bello and Bradley claimed to be near the scene; Mr. Hunter’s accusers claimed to overhear jailhouse conversations. The incentive problems rhyme; the mechanics differ.
- Carter got federal review; Mr. Hunter has not. Carter’s conviction fell on federal habeas corpus. Mr. Hunter’s federal petition was dismissed as time-barred — his disclosure claims have never had federal merits review.
- Carter was freed; Mr. Hunter is at Elayn Hunt Correctional Center. Carter’s charges were dismissed in 1988; he spent his remaining years advocating for the wrongly convicted. Mr. Hunter’s writ application, filed July 9, 2026, is pending in the Louisiana Second Circuit.
Why the comparison matters
Not because the cases are the same — they are not — but because Carter’s case is the canonical demonstration that a triple-murder conviction can be built on incentivized, shifting witness accounts plus non-disclosure, survive years of appeals, and still be wrong. The remedy there was what Mr. Hunter’s filings request here: a court willing to hold a hearing on the full record. Start with the timeline, then the informants — and weigh it yourself.