Law&Crime Sidebar - Teen Killer Who Blamed Acne Drug for Friend's Murder Ripped Apart in Court

Episode Date: September 3, 2025

Benjamin Bliek had a chance to confront his would-be killer in court this week, after Connor Hilton took a plea deal. Hilton admitted to shooting both Bliek and another friend, Ethan Riley, and later told police he’d been thinking about committing a homicide “for a long time." Attorney Bridgette Williams joins Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber to discuss the strong evidence against Hilton, his strange Accutane defense, and the heartbreaking victim impact statements heard in court.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: Go to https://www.groundnews.com/sidebar for a better way to stay informed. Subscribe for 40% off unlimited access to world-wide coverage through our link.HOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Stop snobling. Stop crying. You do this to yourself. I will never forgive you. Those were the words from Benjamin Blyak to Connor Hilton. This was just moments before a Texas judge handed down a crucial sentence that would change both of their lives forever. And it was a conclusion to a case that began with a 911 call from a bathroom hideout

featured a bizarre last-ditch defense blaming acne medication for this violence and a confession so chilling it's hard to believe it came from a teenager. Welcome to Sidebar. Presented by Law and Crime, I'm Jesse Weber. You know that heavy, awful quiet that falls right before something huge happens? That was the vibe in a Texas courtroom this week as 18. year old Connor Hilton found out he's going to prison for decades. This is after admitting to shooting two of his friends during what was supposed to be just a casual hangout at his

house. He ended up killing one of them, leaving another fighting for his life. And right before the judge made the sentence official, he had to just sit there and listen, not to his lawyers, but to the people he hurt. Benjamin Blyak, the friend that he shot in the head who somehow miraculously survived, looked right at him and did it. hold back. Stop snobling, stop crying. You do this to yourself. The grief you have caused the Riley's and my own family, I will never approve you. Minutes later, the judge delivered the words that would define the rest of Hilton's life. But what we have to talk about is what happened just days before. Hilton's defense team, they made a wild last ditch move to

to explain the unexplainable. They argued that severe psychosis induced by a common acne medication, that was to blame for him losing control. That's not a joke. That's what happened. That theory, although clearly didn't exactly pan out the way the defense had hoped, we're going to get into that. We're going to talk to whether or that that was ever going to be successful. We'll get into that. But to understand the full weight of that moment, you have to go back to the night before Christmas Eve in 2023. We go to this quiet street in Friendswood, Texas. This is where a 911 call revealed an unthinkable horror that would leave one teenager dead, another fighting for his life, and a community searching for answers.

This all starts on December 23rd at around 8.51 p.m. According to the probable cause affidavit, that is when the Friendswood Police Department, the dispatch, received a chilling call. A young man hiding in a bathroom reported he had just heard two gunshots come from inside. the two-story home and that there were other people inside with him. So police were there within a minute. Hilton was outside on the curb, apparently distraught, and here is where it gets really eerie.

According to the affidavit, this is how that interaction with police went down. Quote, Sergeant Schmidt approached Hilton, who was visibly distraught, and asked if anyone was hurt. Affiant was advised that Hilton responded by nodding his head indicating yes and was asked who was hurt. Sergeant Schmidt advised Affiant that Hilton held up his hand with two fingers extended, motioned toward the residence and stated there were two teenagers inside that Hilton believed to be deceased. So before cops even set foot inside that house, Hilton is outside confirming the worst,

telling them there are two dead teenagers inside. So officers, they enter the home, they find the caller hiding in the bathroom, they escorted him to safety, and he was able to tell them what he heard. And this detail, straight from the affidavit, it is haunting. It says, Affiant was advised that the... the caller reported being in the bathroom, hearing the gunshots, and then it was silent in the residence. Affiant was advised that the caller reported hearing Hilton walked by the bathroom door crying and stating, what have I done? Now, what officers found next was every parent's

worst nightmare. In the main area of the house, the officer saw one male, later identified as 18-year-old Ethan Riley, lying on the floor with a gunshot wound to his head and a pool of blood beneath him. Towards the back of the residence, they find that second male again, Benjamin Blyak was lying on his back with a gunshot wound to the head. And on a table inside, officers noted a revolver with a teal handle and a gray finish. Now, I have to say this real quick, at Long Crime, we are so proud that viewers turn to us because we try to bring common sense and unbiased analysis to the world of law. But just like a jury that needs to be aware of any biases to be fair, we need to be fully aware of any bias in the news that we

cover, too. And that is where Ground News comes in. So Ground News is an app that shows how stories are covered from right to left to center. Plus, who owns the outlet, who funds it, and its factuality rating. If you want to get the full picture knowing who holds the purse strings and what their interests are, that is a major first step. So let's take the release of the Epstein files, right? It is causing a legal uproar. And every outlet on both sides of the spectrum have been covering it. But as I click from right to left to center, the tone and framing completely shifts. So according to left-leaning headlines. The demands for release are an unnecessary political distraction and that the release isn't in the victim's interest. In this one headline from MSNBC, federal judge

publicly calls out Trump Justice Department for its Epstein case diversion. Meanwhile, the right-wing headlines, they claim that keeping them sealed is actually just more political theater, like this one from Breitbart. Disingenuous New York judge blocks on sealing of Galane Maxwell grand jury transcripts. So look, as you can see, as a crime reporter, I use ground news because it cuts through the noise. It's like having a legal brief for the news. Right now, Ground News, they're offering a special discount for new subscribers to their vantage plan. Listen to this.

Go to the link in our description, groundnews.com slash sidebar or check out the QR code for 40% off unlimited access to their worldwide coverage. In today's climate, knowing why a headline is written the way it is might be the most powerful tool you have. And Ground News puts that power in your hands. EMS, they rush both victims to different hospitals. and meanwhile, Connor Hilton, right, the suspect, was taken to the Friendswood Police Department for questioning. Detectives, they swabbed his hands for GSR, gunshot residue, and then just after midnight on Christmas Eve, they read him as Miranda rights. The affidavit states that Hilton said he understood his rights and he agreed to talk. And what he gave them was a full, detailed

confession. Now, we're going to get to that. We'll talk about that. But first, I want to bring on Texas trial attorney Bridget Williams to talk more about this. Bridget, thank you so much for coming here on Sidebar, really appreciate it. So this individual hiding in the bathroom, you don't always have it in a case like this, right? An eyewitness. How critical is that testimony, is that account to the initial probable cause affidavit and the early case strategy? I think you hit the nail right on, you hit it right on the nail with that. We talk about that you do not always have information or a key witness like that, someone who is able to say, this is exactly what happened as soon as the offense occurred, and he can say, well, there was

silence. And then I heard the defendant say these exact words. That information is critical. And that is going to be testimony that would come in a trial. That's testimony that is brought up in a probable cause affidavit. Also, just the negotiations between the prosecution and the defense counsel before we get to trial, that's going to be such a key factor and consideration for both sides. So that's something that is extremely important for defense counsel and for the prosecution for consideration. Right, because it also lays out a timeline of events, having that witness, whether or not there was any kind of self-defense or argument that might have brought any of this up.

But this affidavit also noted Hilton. And it noted that Hilton was, quote, visibly distraught at this scene, was read his rights hours later at the station, was a prosecutor. How do they assess whether a confession given? under these emotional circumstances is voluntary and whether or not it's admissible. I mean, what should we be considering in terms of the statements from a suspect at this state? But the thing is that so many people think that they're supposed to be read Miranda rights as soon as officers come over and start talking to you. With the officers come and they ask, well,

what happened? They're just asking general questions to try to figure out what's going on. They don't have necessarily give Miranda rights. Once they start asking questions more detailed about actually the crime that happened, then that's when they have to ask Miranda rights and if the person is in custody. So there's two problems with that. Is he in custody? And are we going to now start asking questions about the development of what actually happened with the charge in question? So the officer's coming over and asking him questions about what happened and him giving a statement at that time. I don't see anything wrong with that. In that stage, he's actually going to be extremely transparent because he doesn't have any counsel or anyone or anything to hide, right?

So everything that he said at that time, he volunteered to give to police officers. And from a legal point of view, I thought it was interesting. They immediately do a GSR test, right, to see if he has gunshot residue on him, you know, what happened here. My understanding, though, if I'm correct here, is that the GSR test was done before reading his Miranda rights. Is that valid under the law as a defense attorney? Is that something they can work with?

Does it create a vulnerability for the evidence? Is there anything improper by immediately collecting GSR on a suspect's hands? Well, I mean, the thing is that they have to do, because otherwise that can be something that is bleeding. That could be something they wash off. That is something they're trying to get evidence for as soon as possible. So they need to be able to do that. The Miranda rights are more so for being.

able to ask him questions that what exactly happened here in this particular offense that happened. So the Miranda rights are going to talk about the questions as it relates to the offense that occurred. So is he in custody? And then are we asking him questions? But the actual gun residue, they're going to try to get that as soon as possible because that is something that can be washed off, can be fleeting, but they want to get that and get it in right when they can. Right. So let's talk about this because what was said, according to police, Hilton, offers this detailed confession. And it all started with this. This is per the affidavit. Quote, Hilton stated to Affiant that he had thought about and wanted to commit a homicide

for a long time. And he said that Blyak, Riley, and another friend were over at his house. He had a handgun, one that he admitted he talked his mother into buying for him. They were all just hanging out in the main area when Hilton started showing them the gun. And then, without warning, without argument, he decided to act. the affidavit states. He decided to shoot Riley, Blyak, and another individual once inside the residence. Hilton stated that he stood up, raised the gun, and shot Riley first in the left side of the head. Hilton stated that he then turned to his right and shot Blyak in the left side of his head. Hilton was specific stating that Blyak raised his hands in a defensive

manner as Hilton shot him. Talk about a damning account. And then he finished by saying he fully understood what he had done and that he should be held accountable. December 24th, Christmas Eve, Ethan Riley succumbed to his injuries, and the medical examiner later ruled his death a homicide. As for Benjamin, he nearly died from his wounds, but he recovered. It's a miracle. But Hilton, he was arrested. He was charged with murder and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. His trial was set to begin September 8th, but Hilton instead waived his right, pleaded guilty as part of a deal, and we're going to get to that in a little bit. But Bridget, first of all, you know as a prosecutor what more could you want you have a detailed confession you have him

saying he completely understands what he's doing uh where does the defense attorney go from there i think the only place that they can go is exactly where they went is trying to find ways that could explain exactly why this young man would do something like this and so they were trying to pull anything that they possibly could and so that's when they went into can we bring forward an expert that says that the medicine that he was on caused him to do this. So that's one option. Other option is going to be trying to find the best possible plea agreement that they could do and not take it to trial. So those were two options when something like this happens when you have an outright confession. The facts are not necessarily on your side. You know,

you have to try to find whatever you can or work out the best possible plea agreement so the client doesn't get the maximum punishment that's possible. What's shocking about that confession is It's not like, you know, there was an argument or something precipitated this. It's I wanted to do this for a while and there was nothing that provoked it and literally took the gun up and shot these individuals. It's almost like a clear cut law school example. If we talk about what murder is, right? That's such a great example of a law school criminal class.

But yeah, I would say that the thing that's kind of just about this case are that it's just kind of cringe a little bit about the case is that he's been wanting to do a homicide for quite some time. And not necessarily a homicide against these individuals. He just said a homicide. And that could have been against anybody, right, at all. And so he's a danger. He's a danger to himself and others. He wanted to commit a homicide. Those are the words that he used. And so the fact of the matter is that he could have done that to anyone, but it was to these individuals who were there while he was showing them this gun. And here's what complicates the defense. Okay. I mentioned there's going to be blaming a certain medication on this. Okay? Let's go to that. September 2nd. So this is just a week before his trial was set to begin. Hilton did something. He stood in front of a judge and pled guilty, pled guilty to murder and aggravated assault. In that courtroom, he had to listen to powerful victim impact statements. Benjamin, who survived this traumatic brain injury after weeks in the ICU, months of rehab spoke directly to Hilton.

stop snibbling, stop crying. You do this to yourself. Secondly, the grief you have caused the Riley's and my own family, I will never approve you. Ethan Riley's father, Matthew, had to choke back tears as he remembered his son. I sit here with so much love. Love in my heart for my son, Ethan, Matthew Wright. He's a beautiful soul, full of love. And it's a love that will never diminish. it'll just grow stronger and the it's a light that will continue to overcome the darkness of your evil thoughts and actions and in the end Hilton was sentenced to 50 years in prison for the

murder of Ethan Riley and 20 years for the aggravated assault of Benjamin the sentences are running concurrently. Again, before I go into this planned defense and why it didn't work, Bridget, the 50-year murder sentence, the 20-year aggravated assault sentence, they're running concurrently, meaning he's going to serve them simultaneously. You know, many in the public might expect consecutive sentences for two separate violent acts. What do you think the rationale was there? That's a pretty common ruling by a judge, whenever there may be two offenses that occur at the same time, at the same occurrence, that's a pretty common thing that judges do and they'll run the sentences concurrently. And so that's not something that's uncommon that happens all the time. And so in this

particular situation, the person he's facing now will be 50 years, he probably will qualify for parole in a third of that time period. So that's probably why they agree to that. You have these victim impact statements, which I think are always so important in any case. But for people who don't know, when you're hearing Benjamin's raw anger, when you're hearing Matthew Riley's profound grief, why is it important, A, in terms of sentencing, unless there's just a mandatory sentence of, let's say, you know, life in prison without the possibility of parole, there's nothing really statutorily a judge can do differently. But if there is wiggle room, why is it important for a judge to hear these statements?

And why is it important just for the victim's family members and their loved ones to provide these statements? Also, let's start with why is it important for a judge to hear? So the judge here is the evidence that comes out in the trial setting that is based off of guilt innocence, right? Or guilt or not guilty. And so they may or may not hear how this has impacted the lives of all the family members of the victim or how it's impacted the lives of just the community. And so this gives that the judge that insight, it gives them that opportunity to see, well, how has it impacted their lives? And so he takes that into consideration for the punishment phase.

So most of the time, there's a range of punishment whenever somebody please guilty to an offense. It's not just, oh, you get 20 years. You can have a range. And so the court takes into consideration, how has this impacted the lives of all these people in the community? And then it gives each of those family members to people who actually come up and say their pieces about it. It gives them just that opportunity to feel heard, gives them an opportunity to actually. confront the defendant and say what it is that they've probably been wanting to say for years. So, by the way, with parole eligibility, my understanding is that Hilton could be released

in his, what, 60s? Chances of that happening? Well, it's so many factors that go into if somebody qualifies for parole. And so when someone, most of the time, if they are eligible for parole, they apply for that through the parole board here in Texas. And so, So I would say there's a high chance of him being able to get out on parole early. I think a lot of times people can qualify for that years before the sentencing. So let's say if he's there for 50 years, he can ask to be let out on good behavior from parole, all those different things. So it can be much earlier than that. Now, let's talk about this defense, right?

This is the big thing. I mentioned earlier that just days before this, Hilton's defense team made one final attempt to prove his innocence. This is per K-H-O-E-11, his team argued that the common acne drug, acutane, is what caused the psychosis that led to the shootings. And they called an expert witness to the stand during a hearing on August 25th to make their case. Here's how that played out. Did you form an opinion as to whether or not Connor was suffering from psychosis on the night of the incident in this case that he is charged with? Yes. What is that opinion?

Is that he had a medication in his psychotic disorder? So basically, the doctor testified that in his opinion, Hilton was not in control of his thoughts or behaviors during the shooting, essentially blaming Accutane for causing a psychotic break. Prosecutors, they weren't having it. No, they aggressively challenged this theory. They demanded concrete proof of a direct personal causal link, not just a general possibility. Said he was psychotic because he was taking the Accutate. I need you to draw the line and explain to me how Connor Hilton taking that

Acutane made him insane at the time of the offense. But we know that I could think can cause psychosis. In Connor Hilton. And that's what happened with him. Mental. Yes. The judge ultimately found the argument on convincing, refused to even allow the jury to hear that testimony.

So that was a big bloated defense. There was really nowhere else for them to go, it seems, but to plead guilty. So Bridget, why didn't that not work? I mean, this wouldn't be the first time you've heard defense attorneys blaming a drug for behavior? I would say that it's in the judge's discretion of if he believes that the evidence that the expert witness is bringing, is it going to be helpful to the jury or is it going to make them be more confused or does it just put evidence in a bad light for the jury's?

So the judge has this range that he can decide if that is something that should be brought to evidence or if it should not. with the judge decides that he's not going to allow that into evidence and the defendant then decides that he's going to take a plea agreement that he cannot go back and appeal any type of plea agreement. If he had moved forward, let's say, with the trial setting, even without that expert witness and was found guilty, he could have then still had an option of an appeal.

But he chose not to do that. So now he doesn't even have that option anymore. Has, in your experience, I mean, does it mean that Accutane or some medication like this can never be used as a defense that, or you need to provide concrete proof, you need to show how it affected someone's behavior. Because someone can look at this and say, this is crazy. How is it possible? Someone just opens fire on two people without any provocation. Like, it doesn't make sense. Does it need to be explained by some sort of medication, some sort of drug? Is it completely foreclose this argument, or is it just saying

you didn't prove enough here. There's not enough here to actually move forward with this defense. I think it's just in this particular situation. It doesn't have to be that there has to be a concrete line that draws the drug acutane to this particular killing. So what we're looking for in a trial saying, in a criminal trial saying, is it beyond a reasonable doubt, right? Everything is, can we prove this beyond a reasonable doubt? It doesn't have to be this automatically cause this. That's what have expert witnesses to give their opinions. They are there to give an opinion. And so the court has the authority against or rule out the opinion and say that it won't be helpful for a jury. However, another judge may say, well, I do think that this will be helpful for a jury, and we can

utilize this, and a jury can then decide if they think that that is enough to say, well, this is what caused it. I think that that should have been led into testimony, and the jurors should be able to determine if it was something that actually caused it or not. Now, I did quick research on this, and I believe it has at least been explored in other kinds of cases. So it's not as if it's totally, you know, outside the realm of possibility. But obviously, there does become a question of whether or not it will work. And because the judge ultimately refused to allow this defense, I said it before, but Bridget,

I imagine you agree with me, there was really nowhere else for the moment. to go. They had to plead guilty. There was absolutely nowhere else for them to go. You have an outright confession. You have someone who said that they want to do a homicide before. There was nowhere else for them to go. There was no other defense for them to make at this time. So they had to move forward in a plea agreement or if they moved forward in a trial,

they more than likely would have lost. And his punishment range could have been much higher than what he received in the plea agreement. So in the end, the Friendswood Police Chief perhaps put it best, calling this resolution, this plea deal, a somber conclusion with no real winners. He said, this resolution spares the surviving victim and witnesses from the painful ordeal of a lengthy trial while ensuring accountability has been secured. Justice has been delivered, but this case remains a solemn reminder that in tragedies such as this, there are no true winners.

One family must endure the unspeakable loss of a child. another family faces a long and difficult road to recovery. And our Friendswood community has suffered with innocence lost, friendships broken, and lives forever changed. I think, Bridget, that's probably the best way to explain it. You know, some people will say, if you don't have a trial and a jury doesn't hear this, and maybe the individual is not sentenced to what the potential maximum could be, justice is not served. But when you think about this and you think about not having to go through a trial and not have to having this victim take the stand

and not having a jury be exposed to all of this, the crime scene photos and the difficult subject matter, maybe not having a trial is the best case scenario, right? It certainly can be that way with not having to go through a full trial and having each of the individuals who have been impacted. They were still able to say what they wanted to say. they were able to confront the defendant

and actually have the judge hear their side of what happened and how it's impacted their lives. And without having to go through a three, four-day trial, sometimes longer than that, where they have to be exposed, like you said, to crime scene photos and just reliving that. So sometimes this is the better way to go through it. Bridger Williams, thank you so much for taking the time.

Appreciate it. Good seeing you. Thank you, Jesse. And that is all we have for you right now here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. I'm sorry.