D.A. Gascón says two people spent 17 years in prison for a crime they didn’t commit. Now he’s trying to free them

Two people believed to have been wrongfully convicted of murder may go free soon, according to the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office.

Calling it a “miscarriage of justice,” D.A. George Gascón presented his case to an L.A. Superior Court judge on Tuesday, seeking the release of Charlotte Pleytez and Lombardo Palacios who have been in prison for more than 17 years.

The two were convicted of the 2007 murder of Hector Flores, who was shot and killed in his car in East Hollywood in front of a 99 cent store.

Troubles in the case

Flores’s fiancée was wounded during that shooting, and later identified 15-year-old Palacios as the person who fired the gun, and 20-year-old Pleytez as the driver.

Keep up with LAist.

If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.

Subscribe

Gascón said at a press conference that the conviction was not based on factual evidence, but rather the accounts of three witnesses.

He took issue with the way witness identification was handled, noting one incident where Pleytez was identified out of a mug shot book with only two women in it.

“Two of the three identifications were not definitive,” Gascón said, “and used language like, ‘stood out the most [and] ‘resembles the suspect.’”

Pleytez maintained her innocence throughout the trial, saying she never knew Palacios and wasn’t near the store at that time.

Gascón said, the case against then 15-year-old Palacios was also troubled. Part of his interrogation video was played showing detectives pressuring him into making a confession.

“I’m going to walk out of here thinking you’re just a little gangster who doesn't care about a person’s life,” a detective said to Palacios. “But one way or the other, we’re walking out of here knowing you killed somebody.”

Throughout the video, Palacios repeatedly denied the detective’s allegations. When they left the room, he cried to himself saying that he didn’t do anything. He ultimately confessed, but Gascón pointed out that what he said about the weapon and way the shooting happened didn’t match the facts of the case.

“ While this interrogation video was never played for the jury, it is important to consider because it shows the troubling police tactics that were used to secure these convictions,” he said.

Pleytez and Palacios were convicted in 2009 and sentenced to 50 years to life in prison. The pair appealed their convictions for years. Reports say a local law student became convinced they were wrongly convicted, and helped push the cause forward.

Why the exonerations matter

The defense attorney for Pleytez, Matthew Lombard, said it’s a rare day when the defense and the D.A. come together.

“This is a commitment… to not just securing convictions, but achieving real justice, even when it means admitting your past errors,” he said.

The original case only happened because of Pleytez and Palacios’ set of vulnerabilities, Lombard added. They’re from immigrant families with limited resources and couldn’t afford a better legal defense.

“The system let them down, and not enough is being done to fix it,” he continued.

Palacios only confessed after more than a hundred denials, according to Lombard, as detectives lied about evidence and allegations they had.

California law allowed detectives to lie in interrogations with children up until January of this year. But now, they’re prohibited from employing “threats, physical harm, deception, or psychologically manipulative interrogation tactics,” during interrogations with anyone 17 years or younger. The tactics can still be used on adults.

Gascón said there is nothing that can make up for the lives they’ve both lost, but that this kind of problem is inherent in American prosecutions. Most offices place value on the number of trials and convictions obtained.

“When there is so much pressure internally for convictions,” he said, “you have a very dangerous cocktail.”

He expects the judge to side with his assessment of the case. The parties will return to court on Nov. 1.