He spent 30 years in prison, he was innocent, he is now waiting for compensation of nearly $ 10 million.

Mark Denny, An African-American who, in December 1987, when he was only 17 years old, was accused of stealing and badually badaulting an 18-year-old woman who worked in a fast-food restaurant.

The police department of the skyscraper city arrested four young people for the crime in a Burger King from New York. One of the suspects has been and has always defended his innocence.

Although the accused accused the investigators of "incriminating" him, of "not checking his alibi" and of "falsifying evidence", this was hardly helpful. In 1989, he was sentenced by a popular jury to 57 years in prison for robbery, rape, sodomy and coercion.

The In Innocence Project, which knew his case, presented him to the King County Attorney's Review Unit. After an investigation, the unit determined that the detainee could not be in the Burger King the night of the crime.

This is how the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office confirmed this claim in 2017: Mark Denny had nothing to do with crime. Thirty years after entering prison, he was exonerated and released.

In March 2018, the ex-detainee sent "a notice of complaint" in which the controller was informed Scott Stringer that the innocent would sue the state for justice to accuse him of a crime that he had never committed.

In his brief, he recalled that the Burger King employee did not initially identify him as one of his attackers when the investigators had shown him his picture. However, a few days later, at a recognition conference, the victim pointed out what led her to change her version.

After notification and after careful study, controller Scott Stringer agreed to pay Mark Denny compensation of USD 9,750,000, according to the New York Post. According to this media, Stringer made this offer to avoid a lawsuit against the city that would have amounted to 50 000 000 USD.

"It was in the city's interest to settle the dispute in advance," said the controller's spokesman at The New York Post, after refusing to give more information in describing the nature of the case as extremely sensitive.