Michael Pearson Lawsuit: Evidence of Innocence Ignored

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

by JENN WOOD

***

Mere months after walking free from a South Carolina prison – and seeing multiple charges against him formally dismissed – Michael Wilson Pearson has filed a sweeping civil lawsuit alleging malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, constitutional violations and systemic failures by multiple law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies tied to his wrongful conviction.

Filed last Friday (January 30, 2026) in Clarendon County, the 24-page civil complaint (.pdf) named Clarendon County, the S.C. Third Circuit Solicitor’s Office, the county sheriff’s office, the City of Sumter and the S.C. Attorney General’s Office as defendants — as well as several individual investigators and officials, including solicitor Ernest “Chip” Finney.

Pearson is seeking actual and punitive damages – and has demanded a jury trial.

The lawsuit marks a new phase in a case that triggered statewide scrutiny after Pearson’s 2012 convictions — built largely on a single fingerprint — were vacated last year.

***

FROM OVERDUE JUSTICE TO ACCOUNTABILITY…

As FITSNews previously reported, Pearson spent more than fifteen years in prison on a 60-year sentence tied to a 2010 Clarendon County home invasion. Last year, S.C. circuit court judge Robert Hood vacated his convictions and granted him a new trial. He was released on bond, and prosecutors later dismissed all charges.

The newly filed complaint shifts the battleground from Pearson’s successful fight for post-conviction relief (PCR) to the civil liability of those who participated in his conviction — alleging his arrest, prosecution, guilty verdicts and continued imprisonment were not merely mistakes, but the product of reckless and unconstitutional conduct.

According to the complaint, criminal proceedings were initiated and maintained without probable cause, while exculpatory evidence was ignored or withheld — both before trial and for years afterward. Pearson alleged authorities continued to allow him to remain incarcerated even after multiple officials had evidence he did not commit the crime.

***

RELATED | MISSTEPS, POLYGRAPHS AND A SINGLE FINGERPRINT

***

THE FINGERPRINT…

Pearson’s lawsuit directly challenged the forensic foundation of the original prosecution — the fingerprint lifted from the exterior of the victim’s stolen vehicle.

According to the complaint, the latent prints recovered from the vehicle were first run through the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) – and did not produce a match to Pearson or any known prints. Only afterward — once investigators supplied names of persons of interest — did an examiner conduct a manual comparison and declare a match.

Pearson’s attorneys alleged the examiner conducted the comparison after being told which suspect investigators wanted matched, rather than using blind verification procedures designed to prevent cognitive bias — calling the identification unreliable and contrary to accepted forensic standards.

The complaint further alleged that aside from the disputed fingerprint, investigators had no physical evidence placing Pearson at the scene, that the victim could not identify him, and that alibi information was available but disregarded at the time of arrest.

***

CONFESSIONS, POLYGRAPHS — AND DELAYED ACTION

The filing lays out a detailed timeline — much of which surfaced in prior PCR litigation — alleging that by 2023 and 2024, investigators and prosecutors had obtained:

• Statements from co-defendant Victor Weldon clearing Pearson
• Photo lineup identifications of other alleged perpetrators
• Polygraph results indicating Weldon was truthful when he excluded Pearson
• A separate suspect confession
• A verified alibi for Pearson using information available since 2010

Despite this, the complaint alleged officials failed to promptly notify courts or take action to secure Pearson’s release — resulting in what the lawsuit characterized as extended unlawful imprisonment after knowledge of innocence.

***

RELATED | MICHAEL PEARSON WALKS FREE

***

ALLEGED STRINGS ATTACHED TO FREEDOM

One of the most explosive allegations in the complaint involved claimed conditions tied to Pearson’s potential release.

The lawsuit asserts that in June 2025 — after acknowledging Pearson’s innocence — the elected circuit solicitor told Pearson’s attorneys he would not cooperate in securing Pearson’s release unless Pearson agreed to waive all civil claims and never return to Clarendon County. The complaint characterized these alleged demands as serving no legitimate prosecutorial purpose – and as an attempt by the solicitor to shield himself from personal civil liability.

Those allegations mirror — and formalize under oath — claims previously raised in court filings and public statements during the post-conviction fight.

***

FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS COUNTS

Beyond state tort claims, the complaint asserted multiple federal causes of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of Pearson’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights including:

• Arrest and prosecution without probable cause
• Malicious prosecution
• Failure to disclose exculpatory evidence
• Failure to act on known innocence evidence
• Post-conviction due process violations
• Municipal liability for failure to train and maintain policies on innocence evidence

The filing specifically argues that certain actions by prosecutorial officials were investigative and administrative — not purely advocative — and therefore not protected by absolute prosecutorial immunity.

Since the complaint accuses officials of violating Pearson’s federal constitutional rights, the case doesn’t have to stay in state court. Defendants can ask to transfer it to federal court — a common move in civil rights lawsuits involving government agencies and prosecutors.

***

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT

Defendants now have thirty days from service to answer the complaint. If the case proceeds past early motions — including expected immunity defenses — it could open the door to depositions, internal communications, investigative files and sworn testimony from officials across multiple agencies.

For Pearson, the lawsuit represents an attempt not just to recover damages for lost years — but to force a public accounting of how his conviction happened, why warning signs were missed and why, according to his complaint, corrective action came so late.

Given the breadth of the allegations and the number of agencies named, the civil case has the potential to be as consequential — and as closely watched — as the post-conviction proceedings that led to his release.

***

THE COMPLAINT

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR …

As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.

***

WANNA SOUND OFF?

Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.