Texas Death Row Inmate For Decades, Now Attempts To Fight Conviction Over Hypnotized Witness

The existing Texas state law has come under renewed scrutiny after a death row inmate alleged that his conviction relied on testimony from a hypnotized witness. Charles Flores has received support from several advocacy groups that continue to push for his death sentence to be overturned, arguing that the witness testimony used during the trial was unreliable.

Flores, 56, was convicted in the 1998 killing of Elizabeth Black at a ranch in Farmers Branch, Texas. Although prosecutors did not accuse him of being the shooter, he was convicted as an accomplice despite allegedly not matching the description initially provided by a witness. Supporters of Flores have argued that investigators ignored his alibi and relied heavily on testimony from a witness who later changed her account.

Ever since being sentenced to death, Charles Flores has continued to challenge his conviction. Multiple appeals in which he maintained his innocence have been rejected, even though Texas law generally prohibits testimony obtained from hypnotized witnesses from being admitted in court.

Speaking recently with NBC News, Flores argued that the state would be executing an innocent man if his death sentence is carried out. “I had nothing to do with the murder of Mrs. Black,” he said.

The murder of Elizabeth Black led to the first evidence when multiple neighbors claimed seeing two men get out of a Volkswagen Beetle car on the day of the murder and enter her residence. While the car’s driver was easily identified as Richard Childs, the other person could not be recognized easily.

Investigation for the case turned interesting when a police officer hypnotized one of the witnesses, Jill Barganier, in the hopes of helping her remember the passenger along with Childs. Several laws were broken in the process, including the performance of the hypnosis session by an officer who is already a part of the investigative team.

After the hypnosis, Barganier claimed that the second person was a white male, of medium build and had very long hair. The description clearly was no match for Flores. It was a year later when the witness changed his stance and testified to the court that the man was indeed Charles Flores, acknowledging that he had seen multiple pictures before identifying correctly.

It was Richard Childs who had pulled the trigger and was the murderer of the victim. He pleaded guilty in the case on April 5, 2000. Childs was arrested and sentenced to 35 years in prison, from where he was released on parole in 2016.

On the other hand, Flores, who wasn’t accused of the murder, was still convicted to a longer sentence of the death penalty. His sentencing overlooked the fact that there was no physical evidence or DNA traits that linked him to the crime. He was considered to be a party to the murder under the Texas law of parties.

After so many years, Flores has left no opportunity to fight back against the wrongful conviction. One of these attempts was denied without any concrete evidence that proves the merits of investigative forensic hypnosis in a case.

Moreover, his defense also argued that the prosecutors mistreated Flores' only alibi witnesses, who were his parents. They were threatened with indictment to prevent them from testifying in favor of their son.