Two men wrongly convicted and imprisoned for 17 years are suing Los Angeles County, claiming three sheriff’s detectives fabricated reports, hid exculpatory evidence and intimidated witnesses from telling the truth.
Making the allegations are attorneys for Juan Rayford and Dupree Glass, both of whom were convicted of multiple charges of attempted murder and sentenced to 11 life terms each as well as an additional 220 years for gang enhancements. The men, both teenagers at the time of their arrests, were accused of shooting at an occupied house in Lancaster in 2004.
The lawsuit, filed March 1 in U.S. District Court, seeks unspecified damages.
Rayford and Glass were released from prison in 2020 after an appellate court overturned their convictions. A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge later declared they were not the shooters after another prison inmate confessed to firing at the house. A second alleged shooter had died earlier.
While forensics indicated there were only two shooters, prosecutors concluded there must have been more, in order to fit the charges against Rayford and Glass, the lawsuit claimed.
The state has paid Rayford and Glass nearly $900,000 each as compensation for their time behind bars. Now the two are seeking damages from the county and the investigators who put them there.
Law enforcement ‘reckless’
The actions of law enforcement were “deliberate, reckless, wanton, cruel, motivated by evil motive or intent. … The criminal case against plaintiffs was weak, and the only evidence against them was the false testimony fabricated by defendants,” the lawsuit states.
The Sheriff’s Department issued a statement this week denying the suit’s allegations.
“The department has not been served with this lawsuit, but it is committed to conducting thorough criminal investigations in order to present facts and evidence to the district attorney for prosecution consideration,” said the statement. “We respect the judicial process, but the department does not agree with the allegations.”
DA stands by convictions
The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office has said it stands by the convictions.
“The defendants are not actually innocent,” said court papers filed by the district attorney as part of the criminal proceedings. “The motion’s principal claim — that two key trial witnesses lied under oath — is false. … Respondent has not lost confidence in this conviction.”
According to the lawsuit, detectives acting as gang experts falsely testified that Rayford and Glass were gang members. The appellate court later threw out the gang enhancements, saying there was insufficient evidence to support them.
Witnesses inconsistent
During the trial, prosecutors and investigators relied heavily on the testimony of the house owner — a three-time felon — and her 15-year-old daughter, who later faced criminal charges of her own for attempted murder in an unrelated incident, the suit said. Both witnesses were vulnerable to intimidation by law enforcement, the suit said.
There were inconsistencies in both of their testimonies, according to the suit. The homeowner later allegedly complained to a private investigator for Rayford and Glass that she testified against them because they wouldn’t tell her who the actual shooters were.
Attorneys for Rayford and Glass wrote that the witness was ready to recant her testimony, but was warned by a sheriff’s investigator — who by then was retired and living in another state — that she could be criminally charged if she changed her story.
Investigation incomplete
The suit says sheriff’s investigators failed to interview nearly a dozen key witnesses who were at the scene and would have told them that Rayford and Dupree were not the shooters.
“The defendants unjustly and intentionally resolved to charge Rayford and Glass without thoroughly investigating other potential suspects involved in the crime,” the suit said.
Additionally, eight shots were fired, but some bullets were not recovered, the suit said. The unrecovered bullets would have proven there were only two shooters, said the suit.
“Their willingness to frame innocent teenagers served the ulterior motive of inflating their statistics in apprehending gang members, revealing a callous disregard for the truth and the lives of the wrongfully accused,” said the lawsuit.
Eric Dubin, one of the attorneys representing Rayford and Glass, said, “These men have been to hell and back, spending 17 years in prison with both being ‘Shawshank Redemption’ innocent.”
