4. May the Record Reflect - The Unforgotten

The Unforgotten – Season 5: Riding Shotgun

Episode 4: "May the Record Reflect"
Release Date: April 13, 2026
Host: Michelle Pitcher (Free Range Productions, Texas Observer)
Summary by Podcast Summarizer

Episode Overview

This episode delves into the murder trial of Charles Don Flores, focusing on the 1999 conviction which led to his nearly three decades on Texas’s death row. With the title "May the Record Reflect," the episode examines the trial’s legal intricacies, the role of the controversial "law of parties," shifting witness testimony (most notably influenced by hypnosis), prosecutorial tactics, and the uneven paths of Flores' co-defendants, Rick Childs and Jackie Roberts. Through new interviews with juror number seven (Brian), defense attorney Brad Lawler, and other key voices, the episode asks whether justice was truly served and if the record accurately reflects Flores’s guilt.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Case Background and Key Players

Charles Flores was tried and sentenced to death for the 1998 murder of Betty Black.
Co-defendants: Jackie Roberts (Black’s former daughter-in-law), and Rick Childs (Jackie’s then-boyfriend). Both implicated, but received lighter sentences or had charges dropped.
The Law of Parties: In Texas, it's sufficient for a jury to find someone guilty of murder if they participated in a felony where a death was foreseeable, even if they didn’t pull the trigger. This concept is central to Flores’s conviction.
Quote: "The person driving the getaway car is just as guilty as the person going inside, and they can both be convicted for killing the clerk. That’s just the way it is."
— Jason January, Lead Prosecutor [03:50]

2. Uneven Justice Among Defendants

Only Flores faced the death penalty; Jackie’s charges were dropped, Rick received a plea deal after admitting (in writing) to being the shooter.
Prosecution prioritized deals with those who cooperated, a pattern January defended as routine but which defense called selectively unfair.
Vocals: Racism allegations (Rick is white, Charles Hispanic) arose but were dismissed by the lead prosecutor, who attributed outcomes to cooperation and previous records.
Quote: "Most of the time, it’s who’s cooperating, who is trying to work a plea bargain... Flores... was a dangerous criminal before and during and after."
— Jason January [07:35]
Quote: "It happens because the prosecutor allows it to happen. And that’s the only way I can put it."
— Brad Lawler, Defense Attorney [08:55]

3. The Trial: Strategy, Evidence, and the Law of Parties

Jury Selection and Legal Framing

Jury selection lasted over two months.
Jurors received frank descriptions of the mechanics of capital punishment and what it would mean to sentence Flores to death.
Quote: "If we prevail, the defendant will one day lie dead on a gurney in the death chamber in Huntsville."
— Mary Miller, Assistant District Attorney (Read by Wes) [05:58]

Circumstantial Evidence

No direct evidence (no fingerprints, fibers, or eyewitness to the murder).
Prosecution relied heavily on circumstantial evidence, including testimony from drug associates and neighbors.
Quote: "Rarely did you have anything but circumstantial, and that’s what makes murder cases the most difficult, is that your eyewitness is dead."
— Jason January [11:25]

Key Witnesses and Their Flaws

Jackie Roberts: Admitted motives, claimed to have drawn a map for the babysitter, but earlier told police she gave a map to Rick the morning of the murder; caught lying about sobriety.
Doug Roberts: Offered conflicting timeline details and possibly protected friends.
Vanessa (Rick’s ex): Testified to seeing Rick and Charles together—this contradicted Charles’s alibi story.

Jill Barganier and Hypnotically-Refreshed Memory

Neighbor Jill Barganier, after months of being unable to identify Flores and after police hypnosis, testified at trial she was "over 100% certain" he was the man she saw the morning of the murder [16:09].
On cross, it was revealed she failed to identify Flores in a police lineup after hypnosis; doubt was cast on her recollection’s validity.
Juror perspective: It was "definitive" in the courtroom, but Brian (Juror 7) confesses in hindsight he wishes the hypnosis issue had been emphasized; it "would have caused me pause, for sure." [16:34–17:33]
The jury’s only instruction was to consider or disregard testimony if they distrusted it due to hypnosis—no strong emphasis was placed on this warning [17:54–18:48].

Confessions and Secondary Testimony

Two people (Homero Garcia and Jonathan Waite) testified Flores confessed aspects of the crime to them; both had serious credibility issues (drug use, legal leverage, inconsistent statements).
The defense argues these confessions were coerced or unreliable.

4. Defense Case and Hurdles

Lack of Time, Evidence, and Discovery

Defense attorneys had little time and access to evidence due to the judge’s and prosecution’s rush to trial.
No police files, witness statements, or co-defendant interviews were available before trial.
Quote: "The judge was pushing us to go to trial and Jason was pushing us to go to trial. So there I was kind of stuck."
— Brad Lawler [29:10]

Surprise Witness and Disputed Affidavit

Jill Barganier’s in-court identification was unexpected, leaving the defense scrambling.
Lawler later issued an affidavit (which he now disavows) appearing to say Charles admitted guilt—a pivotal document now in dispute [35:41–38:54].
Lawler claims the prosecution wrote it, he may have signed it, but its contents are untrue.

Challenge in Challenging Damaging Testimony

Cross-examining prosecution witnesses was hampered by lack of discovery.
Key witnesses against Flores had potential reasons to lie or embellish (leniency, legal pressure, criminal motives).

Potential Alternate Suspect Not Pursued

Alan Weaver, a friend of Jackie’s with a similar description to the VW passenger, was ruled out for unclear reasons.

5. Prosecutorial Tactics and Fairness Concerns

Lawler alleges the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence (e.g., DNA from gum found at the scene, potentially belonging to a third man).
Witnesses for the defense were threatened with criminal prosecution, leading Flores’ family and girlfriend not to testify even as character witnesses during sentencing.
Quote: "They arrested my parents at their house... like on TV. 20 of them showing and beating on the door... they're 60-year-old church people... They start interrogating them... 'If you don't, we're going to send you to prison for 20 years.'"
— Charles Flores [51:51]

6. The Sentencing Phase

Absence of Mitigating Evidence

The defense did not present any family/character witnesses (in large part due to threats of prosecution).
The prosecution painted Flores as violent and dangerous, unchallenged by mitigating context.
Testimony regarding an alleged prior assault and miscarriage was not substantiated but allowed to stand by the judge.
Quote: "It was painfully glaring... that the defense just wasn't offering up a rebuttal."
— Michelle Pitcher [49:53]

Jury Deliberations and Aftermath

Jury found Flores guilty within two hours, then quickly sentenced him to death [42:32–43:28].
Brian (Juror 7) says hypnosis concerns weren’t highlighted; "it felt like an open and shut case" [42:32].
In retrospect, Brian is disturbed by new evidence about hypnosis and Rick Childs’s later confession, and he questions whether the right person was sentenced.
Quote: "I would hate to have been a part of something that missed or definitely... put the blame on the wrong person."
— Brian [53:36]

Memorable Quotes and Moments

On the Power of the Law of Parties:
"Our current law of parties undermines the integrity of the Texas capitol punishment system." – Rep. Jeff Leach [05:09]
On the Jury's Understanding of Hypnosis:
"Did I miss that? Like, I felt bad... if it was gained by a faulty witness like that, that would have caused me pause, for sure." – Brian, Juror 7 [16:34–17:33]
On Withholding Evidence:
"They weren't turning over evidence. They were threatening potential witnesses... and they didn't disclose that there was a plea deal in the works with Rick Childs." – Brad Lawler [24:35]
On Post-Conviction Regret:
"Why hasn't the state gone back and said, okay, we at least need to relook at this again?" – Brian, Juror 7 [54:03]

Timestamps for Key Segments

[00:32] – Juror Brian reflects on being re-contacted decades later.
[02:09] – Map-drawing, Jackie's motives, and Rick Childs's role.
[03:50 - 05:20] – Law of parties explained; political and ethical concerns.
[11:00 - 12:57] – Reliance on circumstantial evidence and Jackie’s changing testimony.
[15:19 - 17:08] – The hypnotized witness and its effect on the defense.
[19:43 - 21:47] – Witness reliability and forced “confessions.”
[24:10 - 29:10] – Defense attorney Lawler’s struggles, withheld evidence, and pressure to go to trial.
[31:05 - 34:28] – Defense’s “plan B,” Lawler’s closing and miscommunications.
[35:41 - 38:54] – The problematic 2001 affidavit and Lawler’s disavowal.
[42:32 - 43:08] – Jury reaches verdict quickly, reflecting on hypnosis.
[45:51 - 48:33] – Prosecution’s unchallenged painting of Flores’s violent history; impact of unsubstantiated testimony.
[51:04 - 51:27] – Defense unable to provide mitigation due to prosecution threats.
[53:36 - 54:32] – Juror’s regret and inability of the courts to correct possible miscarriages of justice.

Tone and Narrative Style

The hosts maintain a balanced yet probing tone—sympathetic to the stakes and complexities, but unsparing in raising doubts about process and fairness.
The inclusion of Brian’s hindsight is particularly humanizing, showing evolving attitudes and deepening the episode’s theme: how well (or not) the official record can ever represent the full truth.

Takeaways for New Listeners

The episode is a searing investigation into how a capital case can hinge on circumstantial evidence, questionable witness identification (including under hypnosis), and procedural choices.
It reveals systemic vulnerabilities: uneven justice among co-defendants, prosecutorial overreach, and the inefficacy of post-conviction review in Texas.
The episode’s in-depth interviews with direct participants (juror, defense lawyer, defendant) frame these enduring issues in human terms and highlight room for reform.

For the next episode: The story will shift to examining prison life and Flores’s persistent claim of innocence—further probing whether the conviction and sentence truly fit the crime and the man.