Charles Flores: Death Row Texas: (Yet another abominable Texas death penalty case based on ignorance - or is it willful disregarding - of science, or both? HL): Charles Flores is seeking a new trial because his conviction was based on flawed hypnosis, The Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) reports, noting that, "Attorneys for Mr. Flores argue that he should be grant­ed a new tri­al because of changes in the under­stand­ing of wit­ness tes­ti­mo­ny and changes in law regard­ing the use of hyp­no­tized tes­ti­mo­ny since 1999."..State Senator Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa explained to The News that “experts in foren­sic psy­chol­o­gy have for years raised con­cerns that hyp­no­sis does not work as a mem­o­ry-recov­ery method and it does not increase the accu­ra­cy of eye­wit­ness recall and recog­ni­tion.” By 2020, crim­i­nal tri­als in approx­i­mate­ly half of the U.S. pro­hib­it­ed or strong­ly lim­it­ed “hyp­not­i­cal­ly-induced tes­ti­mo­ny” because of con­cerns with wrong­ful con­vic­tions. The News report­ed that since the 1980s, the Texas Department of Public Safety used inves­tiga­tive hyp­no­sis in crim­i­nal inves­ti­ga­tions at least 1,700 times, lead­ing to prison sen­tences for dozens and death sen­tences for oth­ers. Experts iden­ti­fied for The News four con­cerns with the use of hyp­no­sis by Texas law enforce­ment in crim­i­nal inves­ti­ga­tions: sug­gestibil­i­ty affects sub­jects, crit­i­cal-think­ing abil­i­ties may dimin­ish, “con­fab­u­la­tion” occurs when sub­jects fill mem­o­ry gaps with fic­tion­al events, fab­ri­cat­ed mem­o­ries can solid­i­fy through “mem­o­ry cemen­ta­tion” over time.".

FREE CHARLES FLORES WEB SITE: "

Is Texas about to execute another innocent man by ignoring contemporary science?

In a case fraught with all the hallmarks of a wrongful conviction, Charles has been denied a new trial.

https://www.freecharlesflores.com/

-----------------------------------------------------

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "In response to The News’ report­ing, the Texas Rangers ceased using hyp­no­sis in inves­ti­ga­tions and law­mak­ers passed leg­is­la­tion in 2023 that ulti­mate­ly bans the use of hyp­no­sis-based tes­ti­mo­ny in criminal proceedings. University of California San Diego Psychology Professor John Wixted, whose research on eye­wit­ness tes­ti­mo­ny is ref­er­enced in this case, told KERA News in April 2024 that Ms. Barganier’s ini­tial fail­ure to iden­ti­fy Mr. Flores is indica­tive of his inno­cence.   “We’re not just impeach­ing the wit­ness’ tes­ti­mo­ny,” he said.  “We’re talk­ing about new, sub­stan­tive evi­dence of inno­cence that was nev­er con­sid­ered by any­body, and now he’s out of appeals and head­ing for execution.”  Mr. Flores has exhaust­ed his appeals and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is seek­ing a war­rant for his exe­cu­tion. "

————————————————

SECOND QUOTE OF THE DAY: "“[E]ven though Texas law no longer allows crim­i­nal con­vic­tions based on tes­ti­mo­ny obtained from ‘hyp­no­tized’ wit­ness­es, the Texas Attorney General is endeav­or­ing to push a tri­al court to set an exe­cu­tion date for Flores, whose wrong­ful con­vic­tion in Dallas County inspired the change in Texas law.”

GRETCHEN SWEEN, COUN­SEL FOR MR. FLORES.

------------------------------------------

STORY: "Texas Death Row Prisoner Seeks New Trial, Citing Conviction Based on Flawed Hypnosis Evidence," by Author Hayley Bedard, published by The Death Penalty Information Center, (DPIC)  on June 2, 2025. (Prior to join­ing DPIC, Hayley  Bedard was an Investigative Intern with the Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project. Hayley Bedard  is a May 2022 grad­u­ate of The George Washington University, where she stud­ied Criminal Justice and Chemistry.}

GIST: "Charles Flores was con­vict­ed and sen­tenced to death in 1999 for the 1998 rob­bery and mur­der of Elizabeth “Betty” Black in her Texas home.

 Mr. Flores was con­vict­ed because of the tes­ti­mo­ny of Jill Barganier, the victim’s neigh­bor, who only iden­ti­fied Mr. Flores after being hyp­no­tized by police. 

No DNA or phys­i­cal evi­dence con­nects Mr. Flores to the crime.

Attorneys for Mr. Flores argue that he should be grant­ed a new tri­al because of changes in the under­stand­ing of wit­ness tes­ti­mo­ny and changes in law regard­ing the use of hyp­no­tized tes­ti­mo­ny since 1999. 

According to mem­o­ry experts, inves­tiga­tive hyp­no­sis lacks proven effec­tive­ness for improv­ing an individual’s recall abil­i­ty and may cre­ate false mem­o­ries in crime vic­tims and witnesses. 

At the time of the crime, Ms. Barganier told the police she rec­og­nized one of the two men as Richard Childs, who Ms. Black knew. However, she was unable to iden­ti­fy the sec­ond indi­vid­ual, even after being shown images of Mr. Flores. 

After the ini­tial inter­view, Ms. Barganier was again ques­tioned and this time police used hyp­no­sis in an attempt to help her recall more details.

 Under hyp­no­sis, she repeat­ed her ini­tial descrip­tion of the sec­ond indi­vid­ual as white, slim and long-haired, even when asked by police if the per­son had a clean-shaven head.

Mr. Flores did not match this descrip­tion. 

Mr. Flores is Hispanic, short, stocky, shaved his head, and wore glass­es — con­tra­dic­to­ry to each of the iden­ti­fy­ing fac­tors brought to law enforcement’s atten­tion. 

But at the tri­al 13 months lat­er, after admit­ting to see­ing Mr. Flores’ image on the news, Ms. Barganier tes­ti­fied that Mr. Flores was indeed the sec­ond indi­vid­ual she saw at Ms. Black’s home on the day of the crime.

In  2020, The  Dallas Morning News exam­ined the use of inves­tiga­tive hyp­no­sis in Texas.

State Senator Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa explained to The News that “experts in foren­sic psy­chol­o­gy have for years raised con­cerns that hyp­no­sis does not work as a mem­o­ry-recov­ery method and it does not increase the accu­ra­cy of eye­wit­ness recall and recog­ni­tion.”

By 2020, crim­i­nal tri­als in approx­i­mate­ly half of the U.S. pro­hib­it­ed or strong­ly lim­it­ed “hyp­not­i­cal­ly-induced tes­ti­mo­ny” because of con­cerns with wrong­ful con­vic­tions. 

The News report­ed that since the 1980s, the Texas Department of Public Safety used inves­tiga­tive hyp­no­sis in crim­i­nal inves­ti­ga­tions at least 1,700 times, lead­ing to prison sen­tences for dozens and death sen­tences for oth­ers.

Experts iden­ti­fied for The News four con­cerns with the use of hyp­no­sis by Texas law enforce­ment in crim­i­nal inves­ti­ga­tions: sug­gestibil­i­ty affects sub­jects, crit­i­cal-think­ing abil­i­ties may dimin­ish, “con­fab­u­la­tion” occurs when sub­jects fill mem­o­ry gaps with fic­tion­al events, fab­ri­cat­ed mem­o­ries can solid­i­fy through “mem­o­ry cemen­ta­tion” over time. 

In response to The News’ report­ing, the Texas Rangers ceased using hyp­no­sis in inves­ti­ga­tions and law­mak­ers passed leg­is­la­tion in 2023 that ulti­mate­ly bans the use of hyp­no­sis-based tes­ti­mo­ny in criminal proceedings.

University of California San Diego Psychology Professor John Wixted, whose research on eye­wit­ness tes­ti­mo­ny is ref­er­enced in this case, told KERA News in April 2024 that Ms. Barganier’s ini­tial fail­ure to iden­ti­fy Mr. Flores is indica­tive of his inno­cence. 

 “We’re not just impeach­ing the wit­ness’ tes­ti­mo­ny,” he said.  “We’re talk­ing about new, sub­stan­tive evi­dence of inno­cence that was nev­er con­sid­ered by any­body, and now he’s out of appeals and head­ing for execution.” 

Mr. Flores has exhaust­ed his appeals and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is seek­ing a war­rant for his exe­cu­tion. 

According to coun­sel for Mr. Flores’, the new fil­ings also stress that the Texas Attorney General’s Office is “improp­er­ly seek­ing an exe­cu­tion date even though that office has no legal author­i­ty to do so.” 

According to Ms. Sween, seek­ing an exe­cu­tion date for a pris­on­er in Texas is the respon­si­bil­i­ty of the local dis­trict attor­ney, who has not asked for one in this case. 

Richard Childs, whom Ms. Barganier also iden­ti­fied at the ini­tial tri­al, struck a deal with pros­e­cu­tors, con­fessed to killing Ms. Black and was sen­tenced to 35 years in prison. He was released after serv­ing about 17 years of his sentence."

The entire post can be read at:

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/texas-death-row-prisoner-seeks-new-trial-citing-conviction-based-on-flawed-hypnosis-evidence

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

————————————————————————