INTRODUCTION: "Will the U.S. Supreme Court intercede in another capital case? Robert Roberson is challenging his murder conviction and death sentence in Texas by arguing that the theory at the heart of the prosecution’s case against him, “shaken baby syndrome,” has been largely discredited by the medical community as “junk science.” Roberson’s trial 20 years ago also focused on his stoic demeanor when he brought his mortally injured, 2-year-old daughter to an emergency room. His lawyers have told the U.S. Supreme Court that their client may be on the autism spectrum. TMP’s Maurice Chammah has the story of another case where advancements in science and medicine conflict with legal precedent."——————————————————————QUOTE OF THE DAY: "This will hardly be the last case of its kind. Where the Innocence Project once used DNA to show how innocent suspects went to prison in cases of murder and sexual assault, now the organization is taking cases — such as those of other Texans Melissa Lucio and Rosa Jimenez — in which deaths of children were misrepresented as murders with faulty medical testimony. “It’s no exaggeration to say hundreds if not thousands of parents and caregivers are in prison in cases where no crime occurred,” said Vanessa Potkin, director of special litigation for the organization. She argues the Supreme Court now has an opportunity to “send a message that when there is a growing medical or scientific consensus that discredits a criminal conviction, it can’t stand.” --------------------------------------------------------------------- PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY: "Roberson’s lawyers are now seeking review from the U.S. Supreme Court, which will decide whether to hear his case in the coming weeks. Scientists, doctors, judges and death row exonerees have filed briefs framing the case as an opportunity to stop wrongful convictions based on what some call “junk science.” Their arguments point to a tension in the U.S. legal system: Convictions are supposed to be final, but science changes. In recent years, prisoners and their lawyers have challenged a number of forensic disciplines: from hypnosis to roadside drug tests to testimony about blood splatter, hair, photographs, burn patterns, bite marks, tire tracks and speech patterns. Since the 1980s, nearly a quarter of overturned convictions have featured “false or misleading forensic evidence,” according to the National Registry of Exonerations, a collaboration of several universities that tracks such cases." ———————————————————————————————————— PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Since 2013, seven states have passed laws explicitly directing courts to entertain claims from prisoners based on changing science. Texas was the first, and the state’s top criminal court has overturned around a dozen convictions. But none were death penalty cases, and defense lawyers say it remains too hard to win relief in the state. “You have a law, but no matter what you do, you can’t satisfy the burden the [Texas] court has created,” said Roberson’s lawyer Gretchen Sween. “The judicial system has totally failed him.” --------------------------------------------------------------- STORY: "He’s Facing Execution For His Daughter’s Death. Now, Science Suggests It Was An Accident," by Maurice Chammah, published by The Marshall Project, on September 15, 2023. This article was published in partnership with Texas Monthly. (Maurice Chammah is a staff writer and the author of "Let the Lord Sort Them: The Rise and Fall of the Death Penalty," which won the 2019 J. Anthony Lukas Work-In-Progress Book Award. His work has been published by The New Yorker, The Atlantic and The New York Times. A former Fulbright fellow, he helps organize The Insider Prize, a contest for incarcerated writers sponsored by the magazine American Short Fiction. He lives in Austin, Texas.) SUB-HEADING: "Robert Roberson is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to examine “shaken baby syndrome” and the state of forensic science." PHOTO CAPTION: "Robert Roberson appeared in court in 2018. He was convicted of murder in the 2002 death of his 2-year-old daughter. His attorneys asked for a new trial based on findings they say debunk the flawed science presented in his original trial. GIST: "Long after he retired from solving murders in rural east Texas, Brian Wharton looked back on one of his biggest cases with unease. A father named Robert Roberson had shown up at an emergency room with his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki Curtis. She was unconscious and turning blue. The father speculated that she’d fallen out of bed, but a pediatrician concluded that she had been shaken “very forcefully.” As a detective with the Palestine Police Department, Wharton deduced the father was to blame and testified at the 2003 trial, where Roberson was sentenced to death. But Wharton never could make sense of the man’s demeanor throughout these events. “He’s not getting mad, he’s not getting sad, he’s just not right,” Wharton recalled. Twenty years later, a defense lawyer showed up at the detective’s door, explaining that Roberson’s affect could be explained by Autism Spectrum Disorder. But that wasn’t all. Many in the medical community had turned against the diagnosis at the heart of his conviction: “Shaken Baby Syndrome.” Wharton quickly came to believe he’d helped send an innocent man to death row. “I took a deep breath and said, ‘Okay, now we begin to make this right,’” he said. “Fortunately, he’s still alive when science comes to his rescue.” The death penalty is in flux. These are the stories that you need to know about capital punishment's past, as well as its uncertain future. Roberson’s lawyers are now seeking review from the U.S. Supreme Court, which will decide whether to hear his case in the coming weeks. Scientists, doctors, judges and death row exonerees have filed briefs framing the case as an opportunity to stop wrongful convictions based on what some call “junk science.” Their arguments point to a tension in the U.S. legal system: Convictions are supposed to be final, but science changes. In recent years, prisoners and their lawyers have challenged a number of forensic disciplines: from hypnosis to roadside drug tests to testimony about blood splatter, hair, photographs, burn patterns, bite marks, tire tracks and speech patterns. Since the 1980s, nearly a quarter of overturned convictions have featured “false or misleading forensic evidence,” according to the National Registry of Exonerations, a collaboration of several universities that tracks such cases. “We believed anyone in a lab coat with letters after their names,” said M. Chris Fabricant, a lawyer for the New York-based Innocence Project, which works to overturn wrongful convictions across the country, and who wrote the 2022 book “Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System.” But “these methods were developed by law enforcement to solve possible crimes, not in laboratories.” Often a police officer could become qualified as an “expert” with a few days of training, and portray their subjective analysis as impartial science on the witness stand. There’s no way to know how many convictions — or even executions — have been based on flawed or misinterpreted evidence, and there is little logic to who wins relief and who does not. Shortly before Roberson lost in the Texas courts, a woman named Jennifer Del Prete was released from prison in Illinois after making similar legal claims about “shaken baby syndrome” in that state's courts. Since 2013, seven states have passed laws explicitly directing courts to entertain claims from prisoners based on changing science. Texas was the first, and the state’s top criminal court has overturned around a dozen convictions. But none were death penalty cases, and defense lawyers say it remains too hard to win relief in the state. “You have a law, but no matter what you do, you can’t satisfy the burden the [Texas] court has created,” said Roberson’s lawyer Gretchen Sween. “The judicial system has totally failed him.” The Supreme Court ruled in 1993, in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., that federal judges had to play a “gatekeeping” role and decide whether scientific testimony was “reliable” and “relevant.” (This came at a time when corporations were claiming it was too easy for plaintiffs to enlist scientists to make claims about their products’ harms.) While some state courts adopted this approach, others focused on whether experts’ methods were accepted by their fellow scientists. In the meantime, forensic techniques proliferated, and popular culture portrayed them as exciting new tools for delivering justice. Detectives used “bite marks” to match serial killer Ted Bundy to one victim at his 1979 trial, helping to popularize such analysis despite its questionable accuracy. But in the early 2000s, a few controversial cases began undermining faith in these tools. Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in 2004 for setting a fire that killed his three young daughters. “I am an innocent man,” he said from the gurney. Local investigators had ruled the fire an arson, but national fire experts questioned their work as based more in folk wisdom than science. One compared it to “witch-hunting.” Soon after, lawmakers created the Texas Forensic Science Commission, a group of scientists and lawyers who gained a national reputation for helping courts evaluate the validity of various disciplines, and by 2009, the National Academy of Sciences was questioning a number of them too. At Roberson’s 2003 trial, the “shaken baby syndrome” diagnosis was presented by pediatrician Janet Squires, who pointed to swelling and hemorrhages in Nikki’s brain. A pathologist named Jill Urban surmised that the girl had sustained multiple head injuries. (Neither Squires nor Urban agreed to be interviewed for this story.) \ Roberson’s lawyers didn’t contest this basic narrative. He had previously admitted to grabbing Nikki while trying to rouse her from unconsciousness, and other witnesses said they’d seen him threaten, shake and spank her on other occasions, but there was no direct evidence tying him to her injuries. An emergency room nurse also speculated on the witness stand that Nikki had been sexually assaulted. Testing did not corroborate her testimony, and the nurse was not an expert on the subject, but Roberson’s lawyers argue these claims further contributed to the jury’s decision to sentence him to death. In a recent letter to The Marshall Project, Roberson described being stunned by the medical testimony. “I was already suffering [the] pain of losing my daughter Nikki…like a sudden, violent impact,” he wrote, adding that he’s praying for release, “so I can start living again and so that I can take back what was stolen from me.” He was nearly executed in 2016, but the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals issued a stay, and told an Anderson County judge to reevaluate the science in the case. New medical experts rejected the earlier diagnoses, linking Nikki’s death instead to her chronic infections, as well as a form of apnea that would cause her to collapse and turn blue. She’d been prescribed codeine, which can cause breathing difficulties in children. According to the new experts, it was common in 2003 to see the toddler’s injuries as evidence of “shaken baby syndrome,” but this diagnosis had spread among doctors without much research to back it up, particularly when applied to children beyond infancy. Newer studies had demonstrated that short falls, oxygen deprivation and other causes could produce similar outcomes. At the same time, there was a growing body of evidence that police frequently lack training on Autism Spectrum Disorder, and misinterpret behavior in ways that cast suspicion on the wrong person. “What’s maddening in his case is how they use the autism against him, as evidence of his guilt,” Sween said. (The Anderson County District Attorney’s office did not respond to a request for an interview.) Lawyers from the Texas attorney general’s office have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the case: They argue that none of the witnesses against Roberson knowingly offered false testimony, and that an ongoing debate among scientists hardly justifies questioning a conviction after it has been reviewed by state courts. They note that the medical examiner largely relied on blunt force injuries, rather than a theory of shaking, when she ruled the death a homicide. If the Supreme Court declines to hear Roberson’s case, prosecutors could seek an execution date, and his fate would ultimately rest with Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who could commute the sentence, but seldom does so. Celebrities may start exerting pressure; author John Grisham is already at Roberson’s side. This will hardly be the last case of its kind. Where the Innocence Project once used DNA to show how innocent suspects went to prison in cases of murder and sexual assault, now the organization is taking cases — such as those of other Texans Melissa Lucio and Rosa Jimenez — in which deaths of children were misrepresented as murders with faulty medical testimony. “It’s no exaggeration to say hundreds if not thousands of parents and caregivers are in prison in cases where no crime occurred,” said Vanessa Potkin, director of special litigation for the organization. She argues the Supreme Court now has an opportunity to “send a message that when there is a growing medical or scientific consensus that discredits a criminal conviction, it can’t stand.” The entire story can be read at: texas-shaken-baby-syndrome-baby-death-robert-roberson PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog; SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/47049136857587929 FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices. Lawyer Radha Natarajan; Executive Director: New England Innocence Project; ————————————————————————————————— FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true! Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project; ------------------------------------------------------------------ YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD: David Hammond, one of Broadwater’s attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, “Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it’s the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.” https://deadline.com/2021/11/alice-sebold-lucky-rape-conviction-overturned-anthony-broadwater-1234880143/ ------------------------------------------------ |
Friday, September 15, 2023
Robert Roberson: Death Row:Texas: A superb Marshall Project commentary. It's by Maurice Chammah, author of the widely acclaimed, "Let the Lord sort them: The Rise and Fall of the Death penalty". I read this piece over and over - and urge our readers to distribute it as widely as possible, to being as much pressure as possible on the State of Texas to stop this execution, free Robert Roberson, and do what it can to put the long disproved junk science known as 'shaken baby syndrome' to rest. HL.."Long after he retired from solving murders in rural east Texas, Brian Wharton looked back on one of his biggest cases with unease. A father named Robert Roberson had shown up at an emergency room with his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki Curtis. She was unconscious and turning blue. The father speculated that she’d fallen out of bed, but a pediatrician concluded that she had been shaken “very forcefully.” As a detective with the Palestine Police Department, Wharton deduced the father was to blame and testified at the 2003 trial, where Roberson was sentenced to death. But Wharton never could make sense of the man’s demeanor throughout these events. “He’s not getting mad, he’s not getting sad, he’s just not right,” Wharton recalled. Twenty years later, a defense lawyer showed up at the detective’s door, explaining that Roberson’s affect could be explained by Autism Spectrum Disorder. But that wasn’t all. Many in the medical community had turned against the diagnosis at the heart of his conviction: “Shaken Baby Syndrome.” Wharton quickly came to believe he’d helped send an innocent man to death row. “I took a deep breath and said, ‘Okay, now we begin to make this right,’” he said. “Fortunately, he’s still alive when science comes to his rescue.”
