Inmate Pleads Guilty to Lying About PTSD to Obtain VA Benefits
Zachary Hess Dawson, an inmate at Mount Olive Correctional Complex, admitted to falsely claiming post-traumatic stress disorder from his Army service in Afghanistan.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 10, 2026, 9:18 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 10, 2026, 9:22 p.m. ET
West Virginia inmate convicted of lying about PTSD to obtain VA benefits
Zachary Hess Dawson, an inmate at Mount Olive Correctional Complex, has been convicted of lying about having post-traumatic stress disorder, WOAY reported.
The charge relates to benefits he received from the Department of Veterans Affairs starting in 2017 for post-traumatic stress disorder he claimed he sustained during his Army service in Afghanistan in 2009. Prosecutors say the claims were untrue and that he knew he was not eligible for the benefits, according to WOAY.
Dawson pleaded in the matter, WOAY reported. A conviction is not yet a sentence; what happens next in the case has not been established in the available reporting.
The date of the plea and the specific sentence or sentencing date were not established in the reporting.
Sep 10, 2026, 9:18 p.m. ETFirst report
Inmate Serving Life Sentence for Murder of Wife Convicted of Lying About PTSD
Zachary Hess Dawson, an inmate at Mount Olive Correctional Complex, has pleaded to a charge of lying about having post-traumatic stress disorder, WOAY reported.
According to WOAY, prosecutors allege that starting in 2017 he began receiving benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs for post-traumatic stress disorder he claimed he sustained during his Army service in Afghanistan in 2009. Those claims were untrue, and prosecutors say he knew that he was not eligible for the benefits, WOAY reported.
The proceeding is at the plea stage, and the matter remains open and developing. The date the conduct is alleged to have begun is 2017, as stated in the report; no further calendar date for the plea was established in the available reporting.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 111 Sept 2026, 01:22current
First published.
- Version 111 Sept 2026, 01:18current
First published.
- Version 111 Sept 2026, 01:42current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.