Antonio and Jose's Story

Learn about Antonio and Jose’s wrongful conviction

Antonio Chavez and Jose Beltran’s Wrongful Conviction

In 1996, Antonio and Jose were wrongly accused, charged, and subsequently convicted due to racial profiling, official misconduct, false identification, and perjury. There was no direct evidence, only two coerced witnesses who saw the aftermath from a second-story vantage and contradicted the surviving victims. The surviving victims were in close proximity and saw the events unfold, they did not identify Antonio or Jose in the biased lineup or in court as the perpetrators. Several witnesses supporting their innocence saw two men flee past Antonio and Jose’s location.

On the evening of November 08, 1996, a 14-year-old boy was visiting his friend and spending time with his girlfriend and her friends. Antonio, who was 22, and Jose, who was 17, were at a gathering at their friends’ sister's apartment among friends and an acquaintance. The events that unfolded that evening, linked two groups on opposite blocks 20 minutes before the murder. Antonio and Jose left their home that night not knowing they were never returning home, and that the infamously corrupt Los Angeles Police Crash Unit would frame them for a murder they did not commit or had knowledge of.

That evening, Antonio, Jose, Scott, Richard, Miguel, Patrick, and four others decided they were going to hang out. They arrived over the course of the evening to have a few beers at Scott's sister's apartment. Jose accompanied Miguel and Richard to buy beer; Antonio and Scott stayed on the balcony overseeing the streets and witnessed the victim chase his friend past their building and into an alley. Shortly after, they saw a car full of girls arrive to pick up the boy.

The girlfriend (and her friends) had gone to pick up the boy from his friend’s house. Upon arriving, he ran out of his friend’s place chasing another friend. The girlfriend followed him in their car as he chased his friend. The girls parked by the balcony next to Antonio and Scott and Jose and his friends arrived in a car; Jose and the boy crossed paths and greeted each other as the boy walked to the girls. Miguel and the girls saw this friendly encounter from different views. At this time, Antonio went downstairs to help with the beer as his friends crossed the street to their apartment. Miguel and Jose went inside, Richard and Antonio lagged and saw the girls and the boy drive off before going inside with their friends.

The boy and girls went to the store and returned to his friend's place to say goodbye. One girl waited for the boy by the door. When the boy ran out, she walked ahead and saw two guys with one gun but the boy pushed her to safety. His girlfriend, who was in a parked car, saw two guys appear from the corner, one-armed, enter the driveway. She had hurried to alert the boy but she witnessed as he was shot. Antonio, Jose, and their friends were around the corner when they heard the gunfire; their upstairs neighbor and a friend who were on their respective balconies saw two guys with a gun flee past their building.

The police were in an adjacent parking lot when they heard gunshots and arrived within a minute. Dispatch audio captured their arrival and call for an ambulance, affirming the surviving victims accounts: two males, one armed, approached, shot the boy, and fled, and police arrived instantly. The coerced witnesses gave false accounts, one said the shooter arrived alone, shot the victim and fled, and a second guy arrived after, brandished a shotgunThe other said police arrived minutes after the second guy fled and that she knew where they lived; police led her to a distant building and she pointed to a balcony above the alibis. The police entered the building and told the alibis who peeked, to close their door, and went to a unit above them and detained a man who was with his family. The man told police that the suspects fled down the street but they ignored him. Police cleared him and went below, and extracted Antonio, Jose, and their friends at gunpoint. The coerced witnesses identified Antonio and Jose in a biased lineup, but, the surviving victims did not, they described the suspects as 5’4 to 5’7, Antonio was 6’3 and Jose 5'8. This corresponded with the coerced witness’ testimony who said the victim, who was 5'6, was taller than the shooter who was 5'4.

Despite the lack of evidence linking Antonio and Jose to the crime, LAPD had tunnel vision and framed them with indirect evidence unrelated to the case. LAPD falsely labeled Antonio and Jose as gang members in order to frame them, however, the judge rejected its unfounded "evidence" and said there was no proof they were affiliated with that gang. Ballistics tests revealed no gunshot residue and the use of two handguns, but fingerprint analysis of the spent casings was omitted. A coerced witness testified she saw Antonio and Jose together that summer; Antonio's parole officer testified he was in custody Dec. 1995 and released 18 days before the murder. Perjury by the lead detective was allowed during the preliminary hearing to bind the case to trial. In the trial, the prosecutor presented a false theory of gang affiliation and misstated testimony to mislead the jury. As a result of ineffective assistance of counsel and a corrupted trial, Antonio and Jose were found guilty and sentenced to 29 to Life based on coerced testimony. Unfortunately, the District Attorney's office refuses to acknowledge the 911 dispatch audio that was withheld during their trial, which contained exonerating evidence, as materially exculpatory evidence.

Case Facts and Evidence

Circumstantial and False Evidence

A box of live ammunition of the same handgun caliber, but different manufacturer, found in the female alibi’s bedroom, who informed police it belonged to her ex-boyfriend. The ex-boyfriend was not interviewed.
Shotgun shells used to allege both suspects were armed to frame Antonio.
A photo of gang members, the alibi’s ex-boyfriend, with a gang moniker and unassociated writing on the back.
Antonio and Jose were falsely labeled as gangmembers by police and the prosecution to tie them to the aforementioned evidence and gang. The judge ruled their was no evidence that Antonio or Jose were gang members or affiliated.

Ballistic Evidence

No gunshot residue (GSR) was found on either Antonio or Jose. Test rendered inclusive despite no GSR being detected because 1) they were not in the presence of a discharged firearm, 2) they washed their hands, or 3) timelapse before preserving samples.
The defense and prosecution stipulated two of the same caliber handguns were fired. Three spent casings and fragments belonged to one gun, and one spent casing and fragment belonged to another.
There were no similar cycling marks found on the live ammunition.
The four live spent casings found at the crime scene were tested but analyses were not in discovery or presented during the trial.

Coerced Testimony by Marlina Crum and Lylene Valenzuela

The use of a shotgun was fabricated by the LAPD to frame Antonio with circumstantial evidence unrelated to the crime. LAPD detectives coerced Marina and Lylene to falsely state they saw both perpetrators were armed at all times to correspond with circumstantial evidence unrelated to the crime and frame Antonio: no shotgun was used by the real perpetrators. The surviving victims and other witnesses testified that they only saw one suspect who was armed with handgun.
The coerced witnesses testified that the perpetrators arrived minutes apart to place both suspects armed at the scene at all times. They alleged second suspect arrived after the first perpetrator fled, and that he brandished a shotgun to threaten the victims before fleeing.
Marlina testified Lylene could not have seen the crime because she was inside calling 911 and did not have a view of the outside.
Detectives coerced them to implicate a gang that was not initially reported by them to responding police officers or the initial interviewing detective in order to frame them with the circumstantial evidence unrelated to them.

Witnesses and Alibis

Antonio and Jose had eight alibis accounting for their whereabouts and eight total witnesses who saw the perpetrators either approach the victim, shoot, and or flee. The girlfriend and friend saw the perpetrators approach and shoot the victim and immediately flee. One alibi, two neighbors, and two passersby saw two perpetrators fleeibg from the crime scenario and pass the building Antonio and Jose were in. Marlina Crum’s (coerced witness) mother heard gunfire, turned to see a perpetrator as he is standing and backing away to flee.

In total, Antonio and Jose had 16 exculpatory witnesses.

Perjury and False Police Reports

Grave perjury was committed during the preliminary hearing and the trial by supervising detective Roberto Lopez, lead detective Jesus Lopez, night detective Luis Vargas, and responding officer Ara Hollenbeck.

(itemized list underway)

Evidence Withheld During Trial

Fingerprint analyses of the spent casings.
Initial interviewing audio for Marina, Lylene, and the deceased’s friend.
911 audio contains two calls. The female callers audio contains exculpatory evidence that clears Antonio and Jose. This was not produced during the trial.

Tunnel Vision

Several witnesses were not interviewed or further questioned, nor documented as witnesses.
The immediate area was not canvassed for additional witnesses or to locate the suspects.
Suggestive lineup: Antonio and Jose’s hands were bagged before the lineup. The remaining alibis did not have their hands bagged.
An unreliable informant was used.
The false tagging theory did not contain evidence related to Antonio or Jose. Testimony by the deceased victim’s friend did not implicate Antonio or Jose, instead, it showed that they were friendly with Jose had mutual friends, and attended many social functions with Jose.
Expert testimony and offers of evidence by the prosecution were not substantiated with witness testimony or other proof.