Speaker 1: On April tenth, two thousand and two, on Lynden Boulevard
Speaker 1: in the Flatbush section of Brooklyn, a man named Victor
Speaker 1: Vulcan was shot and killed in broad daylight just after
Speaker 1: school had let out. Fortunately, no one else was heard
Speaker 1: as people ran to their buildings for cover, including a
Speaker 1: young father named Gary Benloss who had had prior run
Speaker 1: ins with the police. Nine one one callers and eyewitnesses
Speaker 1: described the shooter with short hair, dark skin, and a
Speaker 1: similar build to the victim, who was five ten and
Speaker 1: one hundred and sixty eight pounds. However, one alleged witness,
Speaker 1: Anthony Holder, who did not give a description of the shooter,
Speaker 1: set among other falsehoods, that the assailant's nickname was Chuckie.
Speaker 1: Gary ben Loss was known as Chucky, but he was
Speaker 1: over six three and two hundred and fifty pounds with
Speaker 1: a seven inch high afro. A photo of a much
Speaker 1: younger and slimmer Gary with short hair was put into
Speaker 1: a photo array, eliciting an identification from Anthony Holder and
Speaker 1: one other witness. However, once that other witness saw Gary
Speaker 1: a trial, she too joined and all the other witnesses
Speaker 1: in denying Gary's involvement. Holders. Pending charges for which it
Speaker 1: is believed that he received leniency in exchange for cooperation,
Speaker 1: were hidden by the state, and somehow the jury believed
Speaker 1: his bizarre testimony that included a non existent second victim,
Speaker 1: sending Gary away for twenty five to life. This is
Speaker 1: wrongful conviction. Welcome back to wrawful conviction. Today we have
Speaker 1: a Brooklyn case dating back to two thousand and two
Speaker 1: in which several witnesses described a gunman that looked wildly
Speaker 1: different from our guest today, Gary Benlass, a guy that
Speaker 1: I came to know through my friendship with a previous
Speaker 1: guest on our show, John Adrian Velasquez. Now Gary is
Speaker 1: joining us from Sing Sing and I'm glad you're here
Speaker 1: with us, even though I hate the reason and why
Speaker 1: you're here. But Gary, welcome to the show. Thank you,
Speaker 1: You're very welcome. And with him as a man whose
Speaker 1: voice you'll probably recognize for other appearances here with us
Speaker 1: where he's been advocating for Nelson Cruz, Marcus Wiggins, Vincent Simmons,
Speaker 1: and so many more. Justin bonus, welcome back.
Speaker 2: It's great to be back on the show. Appreciate it all.
Speaker 1: Right, So Gary, before we get into the reason why
Speaker 1: we're here today. Can you tell us a little bit
Speaker 1: about your life growing up.
Speaker 3: I was born July twenty sixth, nineteen eighty to a
Speaker 3: proud single mother who migrated from the rural country area
Speaker 3: of Jamaica, West Indies, moved to America where she resided
Speaker 3: in Flatbush, Brooklyn.
Speaker 1: And your nickname was Chucky, right, how I mean, where
Speaker 1: does that come from?
Speaker 3: At the age of nine, I received the nickname Chuckles.
Speaker 3: Being poor no farther around at school, kids could be
Speaker 3: very cruel, so as a defense mechanism, I was one
Speaker 3: of those kids who used to old, like to joke
Speaker 3: and laugh. That's how I got the moniker Chuckles. Always
Speaker 3: had people laughing, always.
Speaker 1: Joking, and that nickname ended up playing a part in
Speaker 1: your wrong for conviction. But before all of that, in
Speaker 1: the summer of nineteen ninety six, you had your first
Speaker 1: encounter with one of the detectives on this case, Robert Reedy.
Speaker 3: He knows me because on my fifteenth birthday I was
Speaker 3: jump assaulted and hospitalized. He was actually the detective on
Speaker 3: the case, and he wanted not just for me, you know,
Speaker 3: to snitch on the guys that hospitalized me, but he
Speaker 3: wanted me to become a neighborhood that snitched, so the
Speaker 3: case against those who assaulted me never went to court,
Speaker 3: and I never became the snitch. For a detective reading,
Speaker 3: I said, it's not happening.
Speaker 1: Right, So you refused to help ready, and then the
Speaker 1: following spring you ran into some more trouble, but this
Speaker 1: time you were the assailant.
Speaker 3: At the age of it's to months of manche in
Speaker 3: ninety seven, I made a very foolish mistake, but I'm
Speaker 3: not proud. It was a lesson that I needed to learn. So,
Speaker 3: because of growing up being poor, I followed a friend
Speaker 3: of mine into a pizzeria to rob the pizzeria. I
Speaker 3: took full responsibility and I copped out to one to
Speaker 3: three years, right. And I've been haunted by the NYPD
Speaker 3: ever since.
Speaker 1: And I'd like the audience to take note here when
Speaker 1: guilty people usually take plea deals it makes sense. I mean, hell,
Speaker 1: even innocent people take plea deals if it makes more sense,
Speaker 1: which it often does than fighting the charges, like our
Speaker 1: friend Dieter te Hada. So you did a few years
Speaker 1: as a juvenile in a men's present, paid your debt
Speaker 1: to society, and after your release, you moved back in
Speaker 1: with your mother at two eighteen Linden Boulevard and Flat Push,
Speaker 1: where you remained on the NYPD's radar leading up to
Speaker 1: this crime in two thousand and two. But before we
Speaker 1: get into all those details, justin we've seen this kind
Speaker 1: of thing before more than once, where the cops just
Speaker 1: grab a guy with a record, whether they did the
Speaker 1: climb or not. And as our listeners will surely recognize, Brooklyn,
Speaker 1: especially in the eighties, nineties and into the two thousands,
Speaker 1: was fraught with wrongful conviction cases and issues like I
Speaker 1: wouldn't smits. Identification coerced and incentifies witnesses who made misidentifications,
Speaker 1: sometimes knowingly by the way, and of course crazily corrupted
Speaker 1: identification procedures. And in this case we have all of
Speaker 1: those factors. And at the helm of the investigation we
Speaker 1: had detectives Robert Reedy and John mcgurrit, as well as
Speaker 1: King's County assistant DA Kyle Reeves. And I feel like
Speaker 1: I've heard his name before Kyle Reeves, right.
Speaker 2: Yes, absolutely, Jabbar Washington. I believe Jabbar was exonerated in
Speaker 2: twenty eighteen. Kyle Reeves in that case had withheld Brady
Speaker 2: evidence witness is on the stand that testified falsely, then
Speaker 2: Reeves push forward with prosecuting someone for murder. I believe
Speaker 2: it was a fight of some sort, and it turned
Speaker 2: out that the mother of the victim actually sued the
Speaker 2: hospital for medical malpractice, wrongful death, that the hospital caused
Speaker 2: the death. I know that he had some issues. He
Speaker 2: left the DA's office in Brooklyn and he went to
Speaker 2: Staten Island, and I know he had some issues in
Speaker 2: Staten Island with witnesses and then left. And now he's
Speaker 2: in private practice. So he has a history of prosecuting
Speaker 2: cases that he shouldn't and two not turning over exculpatory material.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'd like to point out prior misconduct just
Speaker 1: to give the audience an idea of who we were
Speaker 1: dealing with. But to be fair, Reeves doesn't really sound
Speaker 1: like an outlier. Knowingly prosecuting innocent people and heidek exculpatory
Speaker 1: evidence to make it stick sounds like the usual playbook
Speaker 1: in New York.
Speaker 2: It's a little different because it's a lot harder to
Speaker 2: catch them, and he's been caught. New York is different
Speaker 2: in that there's usually no forensic investigation, no paper, right,
Speaker 2: no paper trail, whereas a lot of other places, there's
Speaker 2: a lot of paper here. These are very short, choppy statements.
Speaker 2: The police don't write as much down. And then prosecutors,
Speaker 2: even when the case falls apart, they are able to
Speaker 2: hang their hat on somebody like Anthony Holder, who's the
Speaker 2: only witness that testified at trial A Garribin Lost committed
Speaker 2: this murder.
Speaker 1: And we're going to talk a lot more about this
Speaker 1: alleged eyewitness, Anthony Holder. And I say alleged because his
Speaker 1: description of the crime conflicted with both reality and with
Speaker 1: every other eyewitness, all of whom corroborated each other, and
Speaker 1: none of whom described or ultimately identified Gary in person. Now,
Speaker 1: Anthony Holder was a building super right who were intended
Speaker 1: on Gary's block, And he's the guy who's credited with
Speaker 1: throwing Gary's nickname Chucky to the cops right into the
Speaker 1: mix after the crime. Gary, did you know this guy Holder?
Speaker 3: So Anthony Holder is the super of I believe two
Speaker 3: of the buildings on Linden Boulevard across the street from
Speaker 3: my So I didn't live there, but my friends did,
Speaker 3: so I'm visiting them. Anthony Holder never used to like
Speaker 3: when my friends and I will hang out on the stool.
Speaker 3: So in the courtyards of the building, it wasn't like
Speaker 3: we was causing any disruption being disrespectful.
Speaker 1: Okay, so he didn't like you, but he didn't have
Speaker 1: a real beef with you, but maybe he didn't care
Speaker 1: if he used you to stay at of prison. That's
Speaker 1: what it seems like to me. As it becomes clear
Speaker 1: much later, Holder had some pending charges for which he
Speaker 1: likedly received leniency for his testimony in this case, but
Speaker 1: a trial, that deal was when you've heard this before,
Speaker 1: that deal was hidden by assistant DA Kyle Reeves. And
Speaker 1: now here we are, so let's get to the climate itself.
Speaker 1: This was April tenth, two thousand and two, a sunny
Speaker 1: spring day, on Linden Boulevard in Flatbush, Brooklyn. Now this
Speaker 1: is a broad street with an east and westbound side,
Speaker 1: a turning lane down the middle street, parking on either side,
Speaker 1: so about five lanes of cars, wife, you can picture that,
Speaker 1: and there are apartment buildings on either side, so tons
Speaker 1: of people in the area. It's a bustling street scene.
Speaker 1: And the shooting happened in front of two h one
Speaker 1: Linden Boulevard where you lived, across the street and down
Speaker 1: the block at number two eighteen.
Speaker 3: So it's about three and a afternoon. The weather extremely nice,
Speaker 3: the blocks are extremely extremely busy. People are out enjoying
Speaker 3: the weather. School is letting out. As I am approaching
Speaker 3: my building, the first blunch shot right now, and that's
Speaker 3: when I started seeing everybody starting to run, and I
Speaker 3: ran right into my building.
Speaker 1: And according to corroborating eyewitness accounts, two men, the victim
Speaker 1: in this case, Victor Vulcan, and the shooter got into
Speaker 1: an argument welcome was shot four or five times, and
Speaker 1: then a mail carrier, a woman named let them in.
Speaker 1: Voten gave police a description, as did another woman named
Speaker 1: Paula Edgehill, who called nine one one and spoke to
Speaker 1: a dispatcher.
Speaker 2: So you had let him and Boltsen, who's the mail carrier,
Speaker 2: and the nine one one callers, who described the shooter
Speaker 2: as a dark skin five foot eight short hair let
Speaker 2: him and Boden actually, in a statement to police, described
Speaker 2: the shooter as similarly built to the victim in the case.
Speaker 1: Now, the victim, Victor Vulcan, was one hundred and sixty
Speaker 1: eight pounds, so the nine one one call, and Boten's
Speaker 1: accounts corroborated each other. Now, Gary, what did you look
Speaker 1: like at this time?
Speaker 3: I was about six three two fortys and I had
Speaker 3: a very large afro and I'm light skinned.
Speaker 2: No one describes the afro. That's the other major major issue.
Speaker 1: I mean, was this like a close cropped afro? How
Speaker 1: much volume are we talking about here?
Speaker 3: It would have to be roughly.
Speaker 1: Okay, So that's a remarkable haird like. I mean, people
Speaker 1: aren't gonna miss a seven inch i afro. But unfortunately,
Speaker 1: this giant discrepancy didn't seem to matter to Anthony Holder
Speaker 1: or the detectives, and later didn't matter either to the
Speaker 1: prosecutor in the case. So what did Anthony Holder's statement
Speaker 1: to police say? This alternate version of events.
Speaker 2: And Anthony Holder says that Chucky is talking to some girls.
Speaker 2: They say, get at him, Chucky. Nobody else describes this,
Speaker 2: by the way. Then he says that Chucky begins to
Speaker 2: argue with this guy and pulls a gun out of
Speaker 2: a bag and then shoots the guy and Anthony Holder
Speaker 2: he doesn't describe Gary at all, and he never gives
Speaker 2: a description. See all he does, Anthony Holder is drop
Speaker 2: a nickname, and the police know the nickname because they're
Speaker 2: familiar with Gary.
Speaker 1: And we're not even sure who brought up the nickname first.
Speaker 1: Perhaps Anthony Holder decided to trace information false information, let's
Speaker 1: call it what it is, about a neighborhood guy who
Speaker 1: he didn't really like in exchange for leniency and his
Speaker 1: pending charges, or the lead detectives who knew Gary from
Speaker 1: both previous incidents when he was an assault victim who
Speaker 1: refused to snitch and then the robbery. Now, of course
Speaker 1: I'm referring to detectives Robert Reedy and John mcgerrin.
Speaker 3: It was recently going over the DD fives I've come
Speaker 3: across John mcgurn's DD five. He says that he was
Speaker 3: at two eighteen Lyndon Boulevard when he received information that
Speaker 3: the shooter is a guy by the name of Chuckles.
Speaker 3: Only people that use the name Chuckles is people that
Speaker 3: went to elementary school with me. Anthony Holden never said Chuckles.
Speaker 3: Anthony Holder says Chucky. So before John mcgarran we see
Speaker 3: any information in regards to the shooter, he was already
Speaker 3: at two eighteen the shooting ALFM at two oh one.
Speaker 3: Lend En Boulevard. We have nine to one one calls
Speaker 3: police reports. It says the shooter ran into one eighty
Speaker 3: Lendon Boulevard. It was never a police call to respond
Speaker 3: to too eighteen. Why are you at two eighteen? Right?
Speaker 1: The nine one one call said one eighty Linden Boulevard.
Speaker 1: But McGurn went straight to your building and claimed to
Speaker 1: hear that the assailant was named Chuckles, your original nickname
Speaker 1: that had evolved into Chucky over time.
Speaker 3: Exactly, McGurn already knew who I was the same way
Speaker 3: detective really already knew who I was.
Speaker 1: So this isn't definitive proof, but it certainly looks like
Speaker 1: they were immediately directing the investigation towards you without cause
Speaker 1: either way. Your nickname was now part of this investigation.
Speaker 2: And then they take this and they and they with it,
Speaker 2: and they put a photo array together very soon after
Speaker 2: the shooting. And why the photo array was really important
Speaker 2: is because the picture of Gary is of when he
Speaker 2: was I believe eighteen years old. By the time he
Speaker 2: was twenty one, he was much heavier than he was
Speaker 2: when he was eighteen. He didn't even look like the
Speaker 2: same person, and he had short hair when he was eighteen.
Speaker 1: Oh, right, So they showed this misleading photo array with
Speaker 1: an eighteen year old slimmer looking Gary importantly with no
Speaker 1: afro but short hair instead. Right, as the witnesses that
Speaker 1: initially described the assailant, I mean, it's it's so dirty,
Speaker 1: it's amazing. And the mail carrier let him in boten
Speaker 1: looking at this old photograph gave a tepid identification, right,
Speaker 1: and the incentivized alleged witness, Anthony Holder, gave an idea
Speaker 1: as well. Now, Anthony Holder also allegedly told him that
Speaker 1: the shooter had a black Duffel back. No other witnesses
Speaker 1: reported seeing this, and in the continued effort to get
Speaker 1: to Gary, investigators put pressure on a guy from your building,
Speaker 1: a guy named Roger Isaac, who at about five eight,
Speaker 1: dark skinned with short hair, better match the description of
Speaker 1: the shooter, and so he was snatched up shortly after
Speaker 1: the shooting.
Speaker 3: Roger Isaac, I feel the phone, I really do. He's
Speaker 3: oblivious to what's going on. They jump out on him
Speaker 3: and say he's being arrested with a murder. They bring
Speaker 3: him down to the station in his DD five. He
Speaker 3: saw me come into the building throw a bag into
Speaker 3: the apartment and come right back out.
Speaker 1: So now they have someone corroborating holder about you and
Speaker 1: the alleged black bag. And then Roger Isaac allegedly described
Speaker 1: you as five foot eight two hundred pounds, but again,
Speaker 1: you're over six foot three and at least two hundred
Speaker 1: and forty at the time, and he said no thing
Speaker 1: about your impressive afro, which is very telling because the
Speaker 1: only picture that detectas McGurrin and Reedy had at that
Speaker 1: time was from when you were eighteen years old. It
Speaker 1: looks like they still thought that you were under two
Speaker 1: hundred pounds was short hair. So they brought Roger Isaac
Speaker 1: down to the precinct where he allegedly made this statement
Speaker 1: implicating you carrying this non existent black tuffel bag. And
Speaker 1: we're getting ahead of ourselves here, but at trial, this
Speaker 1: alleged statement from the DD five unravels for the prosecution exactly.
Speaker 3: At trial, Assistant disc Attorney Kyle Reeves is trying to
Speaker 3: have Roger Isaac testify that he saw me run into
Speaker 3: the building build back into the bomment, so he gives
Speaker 3: them the DD five and that's when the cat is
Speaker 3: that at the bat he did the DD five. He said,
Speaker 3: I don't recall saying none of this. He says that
Speaker 3: he was in a cell and that the police roughed
Speaker 3: them up, assaulted mister Roger Isaenc.
Speaker 1: It sounds like they might have just written that statement
Speaker 1: up just for him to sign.
Speaker 3: There was no citilature. This is typed up, and then
Speaker 3: you have the officer's citizature, So there's no Rajah Isaac
Speaker 3: right in and saying I dually swear of this being authentic.
Speaker 3: There's none of that.
Speaker 1: So this sham statement in Roger Isaac's DD five blew
Speaker 1: up in Kyle Reeves's face at trial. But in the
Speaker 1: immediate aftermath of the crime, this same DD five corroborated
Speaker 1: Anthony Holder. They had already trick led him in voting
Speaker 1: into making the ID with that phony baloney photo array.
Speaker 1: So now they're closing in on you, but you didn't
Speaker 1: even know it. So let's go back to the immediate aftermath.
Speaker 1: Shots rang out, you got to safety, and after things
Speaker 1: calmed down, you went out to handle a few errands
Speaker 1: before your three month old son and his mother arrived
Speaker 1: later on from Queen's. Now, at that time you had
Speaker 1: gone to a friend's in Bushwick, when a neighborhood friend
Speaker 1: paged you to tell you that the police had raided
Speaker 1: your apartment.
Speaker 3: He say, yo, the police just went into the apartment.
Speaker 3: So I called my mother. When she goes home, the
Speaker 3: police are still there. They asked her to sign a
Speaker 3: consent for him to search. They already searched her ready,
Speaker 3: so now they're using her consent to cover their eyes.
Speaker 1: So the police legally searched your apartment looking for this
Speaker 1: alleged black tuppel bag, but they came up empty, and
Speaker 1: they got your mom to give consent to the search
Speaker 1: after the fact.
Speaker 3: So at this time, again, I'm not even aware that
Speaker 3: someone even died. It wasn't until I speak to my mother.
Speaker 3: She said. Detective really gave her his card for me
Speaker 3: to call. He said, a guy was shot and killed
Speaker 3: and they're looking to speak to me about it. I
Speaker 3: have nothing to hide, so I called him. He said,
Speaker 3: people are saying that you killed this guy. I said
Speaker 3: it to him, I don't know what you're talking about.
Speaker 3: I've just had a son. I have no reason to
Speaker 3: be out killing anybody. He said, well, you know, let's
Speaker 3: meet up somewhere. I said, that's not happening. I am
Speaker 3: not comfortable meeting you guys and talk them out. Y'all
Speaker 3: looking for me because somebody got killed. He said, oh,
Speaker 3: you know, just nick holity, change in mind.
Speaker 1: And this is right after nine to eleven. So the
Speaker 1: police had all these sweeping new powers from the Patriot Act,
Speaker 1: and they triangulated your position from the cell signal and
Speaker 1: found you over at your friends in Bushwick. But what's
Speaker 1: weird is that they're looking for the old version of you, right,
Speaker 1: They're looking for the eighteen year old, slimmer, short haired
Speaker 1: Gary from the photo array, not the fully grown out,
Speaker 1: much heavier, twenty one year old Gary with the seven
Speaker 1: inch high afro who looks nothing close to the Eyewinness descriptions.
Speaker 1: So both you and the police are confused. Now, can
Speaker 1: you describe what happened during your arrest.
Speaker 3: It's like one of those scenes, almost like the die
Speaker 3: Hard movie. The whole block is just filled with you know,
Speaker 3: squad cars and police officers and police officers on the
Speaker 3: rules and the helicopters. As they were going in to
Speaker 3: the building, I was coming out right, I'm not knowing
Speaker 3: they're coming for me. All right, I'm going to the store,
Speaker 3: and here go all these police officers I look at them,
Speaker 3: they look at me. I'll go and I walk to
Speaker 3: the store, not running. Walking. As I'm in the store,
Speaker 3: the door opened and then a head pokes in and
Speaker 3: he said, hey, did you just come from and he
Speaker 3: recites the building number and I said yes. He asked
Speaker 3: me what my name is, and I tell them my
Speaker 3: name is Gay Bella. He said, I can please put
Speaker 3: your hands behind your back. So again I ain't said, Oh,
Speaker 3: my name is George Jeffrey Calvin, so I'm not evading
Speaker 3: being identified. Does this sound like the actions of a
Speaker 3: guilty man.
Speaker 1: Of course not. But it's crazy because you didn't think
Speaker 1: they were even there for you, and they thought they
Speaker 1: were looking for a guy who could potentially fit the description.
Speaker 1: But as we see here in your case, the description
Speaker 1: really didn't matter to them. They just move forward anyway.
Speaker 1: So you're arrested. Detective Reedy questioned you. You told him
Speaker 1: what you're telling us here today, that you had absolutely
Speaker 1: nothing to do with it, and then they put you
Speaker 1: in a lineup.
Speaker 2: But that lineup was conducted by Robert Reedy and Robert
Speaker 2: Reedy at least one time a couple of years after
Speaker 2: this case, admitted to essentially taining a lineup in a
Speaker 2: photo ray and a case was thrown out on that basis.
Speaker 2: So Robert Reedy knew who Gary was and he violated
Speaker 2: best practices. He shouldn't have been involved with the lineup
Speaker 2: at all, but he was.
Speaker 3: So they take me out of the cell and now
Speaker 3: I'm going to go for this lineup. They took the
Speaker 3: cold I was wearing, gave me something else to put on,
Speaker 3: and then they told me to put on a shower
Speaker 3: cap to hide my ear. And that's when I started o.
Speaker 3: I said hell no, I say, well, what's I doing?
Speaker 3: And I looked at reading and I said, Ridio, you
Speaker 3: ain't right and he just like held down his head.
Speaker 3: At that time, I already knew what they was doing,
Speaker 3: that they was dressing me up to fit the description
Speaker 3: of this person that they're looking for. They gave me
Speaker 3: a jacket. I'm like, hold on, this is not my clothes.
Speaker 3: Oh you got you gotta put it on, and then
Speaker 3: you're hiding my hair, Like what reason would you have
Speaker 3: to hide my hear?
Speaker 1: This episode is underwritten by AIG, a leading global insurance company.
Speaker 1: AIG is committed to corporate social responsibility and is making
Speaker 1: a positive difference in the lives of its employees and
Speaker 1: in the communities where we work and live. In light
Speaker 1: of the compelling need for pro bono legal assistance, and
Speaker 1: in recognition of AIG's commitment to criminal and social justice reform,
Speaker 1: the AIG pro Bono Program provides free legal services and
Speaker 1: other support to underrepresented communities and individuals. So they corrupted
Speaker 1: that lineup, and ultimately both Anthony Holder big surprise, and
Speaker 1: then the mail carrier let him in vote and identified you.
Speaker 1: So you spent eighteen long months awaiting trial at Rikers,
Speaker 1: away from your family and your baby son. Your lawyer,
Speaker 1: Daniel F. Lynch got discovery, and the machinations of that
Speaker 1: lineup started to become even clearer, confirming what you had feared.
Speaker 3: And I said, I notices why they wanted me to
Speaker 3: change my clothes. They wanted me to hide my head.
Speaker 3: These witnesses are saying X, Y and Z. If this
Speaker 3: witness says short here, they cannot put me in the
Speaker 3: lineup with this large afro, so they have me hide it.
Speaker 3: But now the particular witness let him in. Broughton, I'm
Speaker 3: gonna pick her first at the grand jury. And they
Speaker 3: was questioned and let him in Broughton, she stops for
Speaker 3: a second to say as if she wasn't sure she
Speaker 3: picked out the right guy. So fast forward to two
Speaker 3: thousand and three. While I'm at trial, they asked her,
Speaker 3: did you see the shooter in the courtroom? Let him
Speaker 3: in Broughton Unequipancies says no. So she says no at
Speaker 3: trial and at the grand jury she wasn't sure. But
Speaker 3: then at the time of when she's viewing the lineup,
Speaker 3: I am presented with the shower cap hide in my
Speaker 3: ear and with some clothing that's close enough to what
Speaker 3: the shooter had on the day of the crime. Is
Speaker 3: there any reason why she wouldn't have picked me out?
Speaker 2: Two witnesses identified Gary in a lineup, and of those
Speaker 2: two witnesses, only one of them identify him betrot, which
Speaker 2: is Anthony Holder.
Speaker 1: So let Himan Boten was supposed to be a prosecution
Speaker 1: witness but ended up working in favor of Gary's defense,
Speaker 1: just like Roger Isaac. So at that point, as this
Speaker 1: case was crumbling in front of their eyes, all they
Speaker 1: had left was Anthony Holder, who ended up being totally unreliable.
Speaker 1: And we're going to get to his testimony in a minute,
Speaker 1: but it doesn't seem like your attorney should have had
Speaker 1: to work very hard to discredit Holder with what was
Speaker 1: available to him.
Speaker 3: On assistant this attorney Kyle Reeve's witness list, they had
Speaker 3: Paula Edschel, that was the witness that I wanted my
Speaker 3: attorney to call on my behalf. Her phone call, the
Speaker 3: nine one one call, as well as her DD five
Speaker 3: and her after David at the sixty seventh pist is
Speaker 3: very much as fuld sorry and cruel's third party culpability.
Speaker 3: The description that she gave Paula Edshell states that she
Speaker 3: looked through her window and she saw the shooter and
Speaker 3: the shooter was a medium height, dark skinned male. No affro,
Speaker 3: So that's not me right.
Speaker 1: But neither the prosecution nor your attorney called her as
Speaker 1: a witness. But even without Paula Edgshell, you still had
Speaker 1: Letterman Boten and Roger Isaac blow up their part of
Speaker 1: the state's case. So all this left is Anthony Holder,
Speaker 1: who never actually described the shooter. He just used your
Speaker 1: nickname Chucky, saying that some girls were encouraging you to
Speaker 1: get after him, meaning Victor Vulcan. And none of those
Speaker 1: girls ever surfaced, nor did this alleged black duffle bag.
Speaker 1: What other should your defense have poked?
Speaker 2: In Holder's testimony, the inconsistencies are abound with Anthony Holder.
Speaker 2: He says, the guy shot with the thirty eight, guy's
Speaker 2: not shot with the thirty eight. I believe the slugs
Speaker 2: were consistent with the twenty five. Forensically, the description that
Speaker 2: he gives does not match up to the wounds that
Speaker 2: the man suffers. And to be honest with you, I
Speaker 2: don't really think anybody gives a very consistent description of
Speaker 2: what actually happened because of how fast it happened. We
Speaker 2: don't know if Vulcan was standing upright when the first
Speaker 2: shots ring out right, But what we do know is
Speaker 2: that there was stippling on one of the shots on
Speaker 2: the chest, which would indicate that the shooter was very
Speaker 2: close within twenty four inches. Anthony Holder says that the
Speaker 2: shooter was four feet away.
Speaker 1: So it would have been helpful if these wild inconsistencies
Speaker 1: were pointed out to impeach the one the only state's
Speaker 1: witness here was in fact their only piece of evidence,
Speaker 1: but your attorney was not prepared to do that. However,
Speaker 1: your attorney did present one very powerful witness Augustin Hinkson,
Speaker 1: who had called nine to one one and corroborated let
Speaker 1: him in voting, and Paula Edgehill's descriptions and versions of events.
Speaker 3: Augustin Hinson states that the shooter and the victim is
Speaker 3: the same height. The medical examiner at trials stated that
Speaker 3: Victor Volcane sustained a gunshot wound to his chest and
Speaker 3: there was no vertical for ponderance when asked what can
Speaker 3: cause that? Is that whoever shot him with the same
Speaker 3: height ass him. So Augustin Hinton is right on that. Now,
Speaker 3: another part of his testimony is he states that when
Speaker 3: the shoot in was going on, that he he was
Speaker 3: ushering some young children away from the crime. Now, when
Speaker 3: you get to Anthony Holder, Anthony Holder is a legend
Speaker 3: that he was the one that was ushering a young
Speaker 3: children away from the crime. But he goes on to
Speaker 3: also say that the shooter also is responsible for shooting
Speaker 3: one of those young children.
Speaker 2: What I think is important about Holder is there's nothing
Speaker 2: about his testimony that's true. The fact that he says
Speaker 2: a little girl was shot at the scene, when there's
Speaker 2: absolutely no NYPD record of a small, younger girl being
Speaker 2: shot at the scene, a little girl was not. This
Speaker 2: is like if a child was shot at the scene,
Speaker 2: Gary been lost to be doing a lot more than
Speaker 2: twenty five the life.
Speaker 3: That's testimony had never surfaced at any time prior to trial.
Speaker 3: That false testimony only came about when assisted just the
Speaker 3: attorney Kyle Reeves elicited that false and inflammatory testimony from
Speaker 3: Anthony Holder and then later turned around and vouched for
Speaker 3: the authenticity of that testimony. He also presented Anthony Holder
Speaker 3: as this super righteous citizen of society.
Speaker 1: I mean, not only should his shaky testimony have been
Speaker 1: seen through, but also they were hiding something, which was
Speaker 1: that this guy had a powerful incentive to lie or
Speaker 1: to say what the authorities wanted him to say, which
Speaker 1: is that he was facing pending charges himself. And we
Speaker 1: know that in a lot of these cases where these
Speaker 1: eyewitnesses suddenly are able to make an identification, those charges
Speaker 1: that they're facing magically go away and they're sort of
Speaker 1: making it deal with the devil. Is that what happened here?
Speaker 2: Yes, absolutely absolutely he had pending charges, and from our investigation,
Speaker 2: those charges are sealed, which means at some point they
Speaker 2: were dismissed, but they were pending while he testified, And
Speaker 2: interestingly enough, Kyle Reeves, when asked if the man had
Speaker 2: any pending charges, said that he'd never been arrested before.
Speaker 1: So that sounds carefully worded. And why would any prosecutor
Speaker 1: lie or mislead the jury about a witness's criminal history
Speaker 1: or pending charges if not to hide a potential deal
Speaker 1: for leniency. And when Holder's testimony is the only piece
Speaker 1: of evidence against you, stacked up against all of the
Speaker 1: independent witnesses whose testimony was in favor of Gary's innocence.
Speaker 1: Plus Anthony Holder made an unfounded charge that a little
Speaker 1: girl had been shot as well. If that's true, then
Speaker 1: why wasn't Gary charged with the attempted murder of a child.
Speaker 3: It's just.
Speaker 1: It's just hard to see how the jury could get
Speaker 1: this so wrong. You had Roger Isaac let him in voting,
Speaker 1: and even without Paula Edgehill, you then had Augustin Hinkson.
Speaker 1: I mean, was the prosecution able to say that Hinkson
Speaker 1: was a friend of Gary's or something anything to impeach him.
Speaker 2: I think Augustin Hickson was the most reliable person that testified.
Speaker 2: Augustin Hinkson's relations to Gary's is just an acquaintance. Hainkston
Speaker 2: had no dog in the race. I believe actually Hankson
Speaker 2: is a nine to one one caller. That's how they
Speaker 2: get to Hankson. Hankson is a real world person that's
Speaker 2: there that they know is there from the gate that
Speaker 2: gives a statement to them. Hinkson is adamant that Gary
Speaker 2: was not there. I don't understand how Gary loses other
Speaker 2: than the fact that maybe the jury believed that he
Speaker 2: shot a little girl. I don't know. I mean that
Speaker 2: a little girl that definitely wasn't a shot.
Speaker 1: There's a miracle that no kids were shot, but the
Speaker 1: fact remains that no kid was shot. But they just
Speaker 1: made up this story, and it seems to me there's
Speaker 1: at least a good chance that they were doing that
Speaker 1: in order to cast this terrible light on Gary, so
Speaker 1: that if the jury saw through the nonsense that they
Speaker 1: were being fed, they would still say, well, this guy's
Speaker 1: a terrible guy because he shot a child. So even
Speaker 1: if the evidence is shaky as hell, we're still going
Speaker 1: to go ahead and convict him. Am I am I
Speaker 1: off base here?
Speaker 2: No, No, not at all.
Speaker 4: No.
Speaker 2: I think you're one hundred percent right. Holder was a
Speaker 2: terrible witness, but he was enough, you know, he was
Speaker 2: enough to sink Gary unfortunately, and that's the problem with
Speaker 2: the American justice system, is that a single witness like
Speaker 2: this could actually send a man in prison for twenty
Speaker 2: five a life.
Speaker 1: Gary was convicted of second agree murder on November twenty, two,
Speaker 1: thousand and three. So Gary, take us inside the courtroom
Speaker 1: and inside your heart and soul. At that moment, it was.
Speaker 3: It was unbelievable, it was heartbreaking, It was so shattering.
Speaker 3: My life and my world came to a halt at
Speaker 3: that moment. The day I was sentenced, my family has
Speaker 3: also been sentenced to twenty five years to life. You're
Speaker 3: pretty much stripped of everything I was given. You know,
Speaker 3: this new identity, the identity that the Department of Correction
Speaker 3: wished to know me by. They don't care to know
Speaker 3: who Gary ben Loss is. And if Gary ben Loss
Speaker 3: is wrongfully convicted, they don't care about that. I'm known
Speaker 3: to the Department of Corrections at zero three eight for
Speaker 3: one five. But I'm here to tell everyone that's not
Speaker 3: who I am talking about. A young man who was
Speaker 3: stripped away from his family. There's a void in the
Speaker 3: lives of my mother, or my sister, the mother of
Speaker 3: my son, for my grandmother, my uncles, my aunts, my cousins.
Speaker 3: So I'm not carrying this sentence alone. There's a void
Speaker 3: that's in the life of my son, who had to
Speaker 3: grow up without me there that I had dreams of
Speaker 3: his father coming home, but he will never see that
Speaker 3: because he had passed away before that actually happen.
Speaker 1: This tragedy. It's almost hard to even process this right,
Speaker 1: but I know when I was visiting you, Gary, you
Speaker 1: showed me a letter you had gotten for your son.
Speaker 1: Your son grew up without his dad through no fault
Speaker 1: of yours, a no fault of his own, and yet
Speaker 1: you managed to be a good father, a great father
Speaker 1: from prison, as good as any could be, and he
Speaker 1: turned out to be a fantastic kid. I saw a
Speaker 1: letter that he wrote to you, that was a letter
Speaker 1: that any father would love to get from their child,
Speaker 1: where he basically said, I love you and I wish
Speaker 1: things were different, but we're going to make up for
Speaker 1: lost time when you come home. You're my inspiration, You're
Speaker 1: my hero. And that letter, which I could almost not
Speaker 1: read knowing what happened next, was just so beautiful and
Speaker 1: powerful and The awful truth is that the day after
Speaker 1: that you received that letter, he was killed in a
Speaker 1: writing in an uber, just a passenger and an uber
Speaker 1: and a random hit and run accident. I think we
Speaker 1: should really dedicate this episode to his memory.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you know, you talk him out a very very
Speaker 3: dark moment, and I had to find first within me strength.
Speaker 1: It's a tremendous weight that I cannot imagine lifting, considering
Speaker 1: the weight you had already lifted. Perhaps it's the strength
Speaker 1: that you built over all that time leading up to
Speaker 1: this even heavier moment.
Speaker 3: Now, I had to find that light of redemption first
Speaker 3: within me to guide me through this perilous place so
Speaker 3: I can get to that plateau where I can say, listen,
Speaker 3: I'm not gonna let my time in here go to ways.
Speaker 3: I'm not going to allow my wrong for conviction to
Speaker 3: stop me from being the man that I'm supposed to be.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna fight this, I'm going to win, and I'm
Speaker 3: also going to make sure that I'm in position where
Speaker 3: I can of bupers.
Speaker 1: And I've read a bit about some of the good
Speaker 1: things that you've done with your time on the inside.
Speaker 1: In fact, I've witnessed some of them in person. I mean,
Speaker 1: I've been up there and seen you doing your thing
Speaker 1: making a difference. Can you tell us a little bit
Speaker 1: about your work.
Speaker 3: So in two thousand and six I went and I
Speaker 3: actually obtained my GED Now I'm helping other individuals to
Speaker 3: achieve their GEDs. I became a facilitator for a cultural
Speaker 3: awareness class through the CAAU organization, which is a Caribbean
Speaker 3: afric community. I've partaked an alternative violence program where you
Speaker 3: help to mentor people to find a way to allegate
Speaker 3: situations without the meanings of violence. Twenty twelve, I was
Speaker 3: in the Electrical Trade program. I actually advanced and became
Speaker 3: an IT which is called inmate program assistant. It was
Speaker 3: an assistant to the teacher, so I became a facilitator
Speaker 3: and through that also allowed me the opportunity to gain
Speaker 3: my apprenticeship through the NCCER course, where I was able
Speaker 3: to take the same type of tests and courses that
Speaker 3: a person on the outside would so they could become electrician.
Speaker 3: When I came to since immediately signed up for the
Speaker 3: Mercy College Hustling program that they have here where I
Speaker 3: am actually going for my bachelor's in Behavioral Science. I
Speaker 3: wasn't allowing my state of mind incarceration to hold me back,
Speaker 3: and I was setting down the stones for my future.
Speaker 3: And I have a look back.
Speaker 1: No, you have not. And you've brought that same proactive
Speaker 1: and incredibly positive spirit to the work that you've done
Speaker 1: inside with a group of guys called the AI Team,
Speaker 1: the Actual Innocence Team, good name. Longtime listeners of the
Speaker 1: show will remember other members of this New York based crew,
Speaker 1: of whom are already out. I'm talking about Derek Hamilton,
Speaker 1: Shabaka Shakur, and of course Nelson Cruz, Danny rin Khan
Speaker 1: and yourself still remain inside. You also were friendly with
Speaker 1: another great friend of the show and great personal friend
Speaker 1: of mine, personal hero, I would say, I'm talking about
Speaker 1: JJ Velasquez, who is another just incredibly inspirational man.
Speaker 3: Being around these individuals also help to give me a
Speaker 3: sense of hope and courage because now you no longer
Speaker 3: feel alone. And we'll go to law a lotberries weill
Speaker 3: research cases and we'll see what we can find will
Speaker 3: be able to help us. Oh, that idea is a
Speaker 3: batchling issue, that's a strictly versus Washington issue. Oh, that's
Speaker 3: the way the issue and that's how I started to
Speaker 3: learn the law. Interestinctly. You know, it's not supposed to happen,
Speaker 3: but now you can put legal theory to it. Now
Speaker 3: it's more than just going into a call, submitting a
Speaker 3: piece of paper and saying I didn't do it.
Speaker 1: So you fought your case for a while this way,
Speaker 1: and eventually Derek, Shabaka and JJ got out, and slowly
Speaker 1: but surely you got your case in front of our
Speaker 1: friend Justin here. So Justin, what has happened so far
Speaker 1: in Gary's post conviction fight and where does his case stand?
Speaker 3: Now? Okay?
Speaker 2: Well, Gary, you know, of course he filed a direct appeal.
Speaker 2: And what's very interesting about Gary's direct appeal is that
Speaker 2: he's we're saying the same thing that we're saying now, right,
Speaker 2: Gary has been consistent since day one. He filed a
Speaker 2: motion to vacate his conviction back in two thousand and two.
Speaker 2: One of the issues was the fact that Anthony Holder
Speaker 2: had a criminal charge that was pending during the trial
Speaker 2: that was never disclosed. Actually, Kyle Reeves, as per usual,
Speaker 2: I should say, Kyle Reeves, failed to turn that over
Speaker 2: and actually indicated that Anthony Holder had never been arrested
Speaker 2: in his life, which was totally untrue. That just goes
Speaker 2: along with Kyle Reeves's theme. But as of right now,
Speaker 2: you know, we are really reinvestigating the forensics at the
Speaker 2: scene and pulling all the files from the NYPD and
Speaker 2: the District Attorney's office to prepare for another four point
Speaker 2: forty or to go to the conviction Review Unit, which
Speaker 2: I do think would be very interested in this case
Speaker 2: based upon how unreliable the evidence is here that convicted
Speaker 2: Gary and the evidence of innocence. You know, Jason, I
Speaker 2: think the biggest thing is what makes a case like
Speaker 2: Gary's very strong is the evidence that's in the possession
Speaker 2: of the prosecutor. And when you look at that, including
Speaker 2: Augustin Hinkson let him in Bolton and then a nine
Speaker 2: to one one caller, three people all say that Gary
Speaker 2: beIN Lost is not the shooter here, He's not the
Speaker 2: person that killed Victor Vulcan. And I think that that's
Speaker 2: overwhelming evidence of innocence in comparison to any holder. And
Speaker 2: that's what we're working on right now is tying that
Speaker 2: all together, both forensically and through our investigation and to
Speaker 2: see if there's any more Brady evidence out there because
Speaker 2: there was at least one witness that was interviewed that
Speaker 2: was friends with Victor Vulcan that stated that Victor Vulcan
Speaker 2: had beef with people from his own block. He was
Speaker 2: not from the block where he was found murdered at.
Speaker 2: So you know, we are investigating all these claims before
Speaker 2: we do anything, but we're evaluating whether we go forward
Speaker 2: with another motion to vacate or go to Brooklyn's Conviction
Speaker 2: Review Unit.
Speaker 1: Justin what can people do? And I'm sure people are listening,
Speaker 1: heartbroken and angry and motivated. So what can people do
Speaker 1: to help bring some semblance of justice for Gary?
Speaker 2: I would say start off by reaching out to Ari Gonzales,
Speaker 2: Brooklyn DA's office, and also Gary has a change dot
Speaker 2: org page, and support the petition and continue to support
Speaker 2: people who are like Gary. I think that's the biggest problem.
Speaker 2: There needs to be more support from a broader base
Speaker 2: in the country.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: It has to be more than just the people that
Speaker 2: have been affected by roomful convictions. It has to be
Speaker 2: people that are just regular, average American citizens because they
Speaker 2: need to understand that this could be you, Because it
Speaker 2: could be you, it could be your son, it could
Speaker 2: be your daughter. It could it could be anybody, it
Speaker 2: could be you, and people need to stop acting like
Speaker 2: that that's not a fact.
Speaker 1: We will link in the bio to the petition and
Speaker 1: to other information about the case. Please do click on
Speaker 1: the link in the bio, sign the petition and get involved,
Speaker 1: and we'll hopefully be able to publish an update to
Speaker 1: this episode sometime and then not to distant future where
Speaker 1: we get to speak with Gary from the outside. And now,
Speaker 1: of course it's time to turn to the closing of
Speaker 1: our show, which everyone knows is called closing arguments, and
Speaker 1: this is where I thank you guys again. I'm going
Speaker 1: to turn over to you first, justin for your thoughts,
Speaker 1: any other thoughts you want to share, and then of
Speaker 1: course hand off to Gary and he'll take us off
Speaker 1: into the sunset.
Speaker 2: The first thing that we really need to consider in
Speaker 2: this case is because it happens over and over and
Speaker 2: over again in identification cases, is where there's a description
Speaker 2: that does not match the person that they end up arrestling. Obviously,
Speaker 2: common sense says that the suspect should match the description
Speaker 2: that the witnesses say was the perpetrator, and Gary's case
Speaker 2: is very typical, especially in a place like New York
Speaker 2: City where the police don't care. They just don't care.
Speaker 2: They get a name, they focus on the name. They
Speaker 2: don't care that the person that is this name doesn't
Speaker 2: match the description of the perpetrator given by the witnesses.
Speaker 2: That just goes right out the window. People don't think
Speaker 2: that that's true. But Gary is evident to that. And
Speaker 2: I can tell you as an attorney that practices in
Speaker 2: New York City every day, that that happens all the time,
Speaker 2: and it's still has happens in twenty twenty two. And
Speaker 2: Gary is a He's a spot on case of where
Speaker 2: the police didn't care. And the police didn't care because
Speaker 2: they knew his name, they knew who he was. They
Speaker 2: focused in on him. They put him in a photo
Speaker 2: ray with a photo that didn't match anything that looked
Speaker 2: like him. It matched more the description of what the
Speaker 2: witnesses said the perpetrator looked like. And what I mean
Speaker 2: by that is obviously a photo array. All you really
Speaker 2: have is the head. The person had short hair in
Speaker 2: the photo ray, right, so that at least matched more
Speaker 2: the description of the perpetrator. They went and they arrested Gary.
Speaker 2: Then they put him in a lineup where he looks
Speaker 2: nothing like he looked in the photo ray and Robert
Speaker 2: Reedy is the one that handles the identification and the
Speaker 2: witnesses somehow identify him in the lineup. The person that's
Speaker 2: running these procedures should not be involved with the investigation
Speaker 2: and they should not know who the subject is. And
Speaker 2: Robert Reedy has done this before. He's gotten called out,
Speaker 2: cases have been thrown out because he suggested and tainted
Speaker 2: identification procedures. And then who does Robert Reed? He hand
Speaker 2: the case off to Kyle Reeves, who's framed numerous men,
Speaker 2: scumback of the highest order. And people need to understand
Speaker 2: what is the DA's job. The DA's job is to
Speaker 2: vet the police's investigation. Kyle Reeves doesn't vet an investigation.
Speaker 2: He takes the investigation and he fixes it. He does
Speaker 2: the opposite of what you're supposed to do. And even
Speaker 2: in the face of descriptions of a perpetrator that are
Speaker 2: eighty pounds less and half a foot shorter than Gary
Speaker 2: ben Lost and having a haircut that doesn't match the
Speaker 2: afro that Gary ben Loss says, there's nothing about the
Speaker 2: shooter in this case that matches the description of gary
Speaker 2: Ben Lost. Kyle Reeves still takes this to trial. He
Speaker 2: puts let him In Bolton on the stand. She stands
Speaker 2: up in courtiess, and you see the guy that shot
Speaker 2: the victim, Victor Vulcan here. She says no. She says no.
Speaker 2: Her testimony matches her initial description of the shoe, which
Speaker 2: it was not gary Ben Lost. That's a non identification.
Speaker 2: He puts Anthony Holder on the witness stand. Anthony Holder
Speaker 2: gives a ridiculous testimony that is not consistent at all
Speaker 2: with the evidence of the scene, not consistent at all
Speaker 2: with the other witnesses at the scene. Says that a
Speaker 2: little girl was shot at the scene. There is no
Speaker 2: NYPD record of a little girl being shot. And let
Speaker 2: me tell you, if a little if a child was
Speaker 2: shot at the scene, Gary beIN Loss to be doing
Speaker 2: a lot more than twenty five to life, Okay, he
Speaker 2: would be, and there would be absolutely police reports indicating
Speaker 2: that medical reports indicating there wasn't. Anthony Holder completely lies.
Speaker 2: There's not one shred of his testimony that is true.
Speaker 2: And then another witness comes in and says that it
Speaker 2: wasn't gary Ben Lost. That the defense calls. But what
Speaker 2: the defense failed to do here, which they often do,
Speaker 2: is they failed to put on the nine to one
Speaker 2: to one caller that described the shooter as five foot eight,
Speaker 2: dark skin with short hair. The defense failed to cross
Speaker 2: examine let him in Bolton, even though she said that
Speaker 2: Gary ben Loss wasn't the person that she saw fining
Speaker 2: the weapon that day. The jury never heard the description
Speaker 2: of let him in Bolten that the shooter matched the
Speaker 2: description and body type of the victim, who was five
Speaker 2: ft ten, one hundred and sixty eight pounds. That could
Speaker 2: have definitively proved to the jury. It would have overridden
Speaker 2: the terrible testimony of Anthony Holder. I don't even really
Speaker 2: need to do a reinvestigation here. It's clear Gary is innocent.
Speaker 2: He's been in jail for over twenty years at this point.
Speaker 2: It's a travestyjustice. But it's all too often of a story,
Speaker 2: especially in a place like New York York City. Eyewitness
Speaker 2: identification is a real problem in New York City. It's
Speaker 2: all too often of a story. And it is just
Speaker 2: tragic with Gary because he should have never been arrested,
Speaker 2: should have never been charged, and he was just railroaded.
Speaker 3: The traumatic and irreparable effects of wrongful conviction just don't
Speaker 3: affect those wrongfully convicted. It also impacts the lives of
Speaker 3: their families, their communities, and the fabric of our nation.
Speaker 3: To ed explain what I mean, I will let you
Speaker 3: share this letter with you are. It was written by
Speaker 3: my beloved son, Isaiah Benloss, who was seventeen years old
Speaker 3: at the time. It reads, Dear Sir Madam, I'm writing
Speaker 3: on behalf of my father, Gary Benloss. When I was
Speaker 3: a baby, I never really got the chance to spend
Speaker 3: time and bond with my father until I got older.
Speaker 3: This situation really got to me while I was growing
Speaker 3: up without him. He wasn't there when I first picked
Speaker 3: up a basketball and when I first rode a bike. Also,
Speaker 3: he wasn't there when I graduated elementary and middle school.
Speaker 3: All I wish is for me and him to go
Speaker 3: out and bond with each other. Even though he wasn't
Speaker 3: there for my elementary in middle school years. I hope
Speaker 3: he can be there when I graduated from high school
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty. I hope whoever is reading this you
Speaker 3: find it in your heart to give my father early parole.
Speaker 3: Please thank you in advance. Ceceili Isaiah Benloss that was
Speaker 3: written in April twenty second of twenty nineteen, and as
Speaker 3: you see, I'm still in prison, so he never got
Speaker 3: that wish for me to be there for his graduation.
Speaker 3: In June of twenty twenty, the month following his graduation,
Speaker 3: he sent me a car for my birthday and it reads,
Speaker 3: happy birthday to the real O Gie. I just want
Speaker 3: to say thank you for being real with me, believing
Speaker 3: in me when no one did it, still being real
Speaker 3: and never switching up and sticking it through even in
Speaker 3: these hard times. I know you can't be out here
Speaker 3: with me and wishing things could have been different, but
Speaker 3: I always reminded myself and never regret what I have,
Speaker 3: because then I wouldn't have you and my amazing girlfriend
Speaker 3: and family that I loved daily. I appreciate and love
Speaker 3: you that Hopefully when you get out you can make
Speaker 3: up for lost times. I love your pops can sell
Speaker 3: your son, Isaiah Benlos again. Those wishes would never be manifested.
Speaker 3: But just a day after receiving this card from my son,
Speaker 3: he was in a tragic car accident that lay to
Speaker 3: claim this life. So as I leave you all here
Speaker 3: with these final thoughts, as I studied before the state
Speaker 3: of wrongful conviction doesn't just impact those wrongfully convicted, it
Speaker 3: also affects the families.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. I'd
Speaker 4: like to thank our production team Connor Hall, Jeff Cliburn,
Speaker 4: and Kevin Wardis, with research by Lyla Robinson. The music
Speaker 4: in this production was supplied by three time OSCAR nominated
Speaker 4: composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow us on Instagram
Speaker 4: at Wrongful Conviction, on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction podcast, and
Speaker 4: on Twitter at wrong Conviction, as well as at.
Speaker 1: Lava for Good. On all three platforms, you can also
Speaker 1: follow me on both TikTok and Instagram at it's Jason flamm.
Speaker 1: Conviction is the production of Lava for Good Podcasts and
Speaker 1: association with Signal Company Number one