Bronx Marijuana Entrepreneur on Trial in Manhattan for Cocaine But Cool on the Cross

Bronx Marijuana Entrepreneur on Trial in Manhattan for Cocaine But Cool on the Cross by Matthew & Russell Lee, Patreon Substack 100 Centre Street, Sept 21 – A Bronx man, who like many seeks his insurance in other states to save costs, is on trial in 100 Centre Street on three narcotics charges. On Monday he took the stand in his own defense, including a long cross examination.   Unlike recent 100 Centre defendant Isaac Argro, Kenroy Gladden came off cool, calm and collected. Perhaps it's not surprising: he has had previous legal victories just down Baxter Street in Federal court.  Inner City Press covered both courts - and EDNY in Brooklyn too. The afternoon session began with his retained lawyer taking him through the events leading to the Special Narcotics Prosecutor's charges. First he asked him about his many companies at the time: cleaning and picking up trash for the Bronx-based empire of Banana Kelly, an entertainment firm facilitating the arrival of artists at venues and a marijuana social club.     The club was supplied by his cousin's marijuana farm in Oklahoma. In Kenroy's telling, his cousin Albert called him asking him to buy a blue Volvo for work on the farm, for up to $20,000.     As a self-described hustler, the defendant said, he figured if he found a Volvo for under that, he could keep the difference. On cross he acknowledged this had not been explicitly agreed to but described it as the unspoken understanding.     He bought the car in Virginia, using as also came out on cross the insurance of his ex-girlfriend in North Carolina.  (The prosecutor asked, So you were intimate? He asked back, You mean, Did we have sex? The answer was yes).   He took the opportunity to complain that while the car had been labeled as $14,000 online, he in fact paid nearly $16,000, the final thousand of it borrowed.    He dropped it off at his former residence, now that of his cousin's girlfriend, on Palisades Avenue in The Bronx. He later again at his cousin's request took a brown Volvo for servicing at White Plains Volvo.    Inexorably the narrative continued until it reached the day of his arrest. On it, according to his testimony, he received a sudden call from his cousin asking him to pick up from a Co-Op City location the blue Volvo, the registration of which had long expired. His cousin said only the buyer could renew the registration, which would require a trip to Atlanta, the location of his license.      Directly after he picked up the car, his cousin drove up with a third acquaintance, whom he later in his testimony linked to drugs. The car they drove up in was the subject of much cross examination inquiry as it was found to be registered in both his name and that of his North Carolina ex-girlfriend.     They wanted to buy a marijuana plant. The defendant came along and bought a beef patty at the same store. They then went to park the blue Volvo in a parking lot where the defendant scraped off the expired registration sticker while his cousin looked unsuccessfully for the title of the car. The third man? He looked for a screw driver to remove the expired temporary license plate. At least these were their stated occupations.    The police came to arrest them, telling them to get on the ground. The defendant ran; he said he did not know who they were. The prosecutor asked if he hadn't pointed at the seat. He said no.    They found in the car, seemingly in the backpack of his cousin, two kilograms of cocaine. In the defendant's car, they found fliers advertising a second branch of his marijuana social club.     Arrests were executed. Finally the direct examination came to a close. Did he know that a trap had been installed in the car? Did he possess or see a magnet? Did he see the drugs? He answered no to each question.   On cross, the prosecutor tried several tacks. Did the defendant just want to make money, no matter which field? No, came the answer.     He had multiple packages en route to the Palisades Avenue residence on the same day. Was this really simply an accident of not fully changing his address and clicking the wrong buttons? The defendant said it wasn't exactly as accident, he simply didn't care much where he had to pick up his packages -- although he now regretted having had them delivered there.     Amid the questions about intimate relations with the North Carolina ex-girlfriend, the prosecutor delved into his Banana Kelly-running companion, noting the payments to his cleaning business.   The cross examination came to a close with Gladden parrying question after questions, about why a car was registered in North Carolina (it was to save on insurance costs, he said) and whether "snowball" in a text message referred to cocaine or, as the defendant said, a combination of hash, THC and "weed."    "Look at this emoji," the prosecutor demanded.    I don't use emojis, the defendant replied, asking the court officer to fill his water glass again.   No further questions, the prosecutor said.   Will there be a rebuttal case? Some would say, there should be.  Some also ask: why is he on trial in Manhattan for these acts in The Bronx? The answer arose during the charge conference after the jury left: the Special Narcotics Prosecutor can bring its cases wherever it wants. And the Bronx, and its jurors, are apparently not wanted. We aim to have more on this. Watch this site. *** Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron. Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com Mail: Box 130222, Chinatown Station, NY NY 10013 Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.  Copyright 2006-2026 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com