Karla Faye Tucker's case epitomizes some of the problems within the Texas death penalty system. Tucker was convicted of a 1983 double murder in Houston.
Tucker and her accomplice, Daniel Garrett, broke into the apartment of Jerry Lynn Dean and Deborah Thornton. Both Tucker and Garrett were under the influence of drugs at the time. They attacked and killed both victims with a pickaxe and other objects, resulting in a particularly gruesome and brutal crime.
Tucker and Garrett were quickly captured and arrested. A year later, they were tried and convicted of the murders. Both were given the death penalty, but Garrett died from liver disease before he could be executed.
While in prison, Tucker underwent a religious conversion to Christianity that attracted national attention by many of America’s top televangelists, including Pat Robertson.
He appealed to the Texas Governor George W. Bush who also had a public religious conversion but who also wanted to appear to be tough on crime.
There was a national appeal to Bush to commute Tucker's sentence that gained widespread media attention, debate and controversy.
Despite Tucker’s expressions of remorse and redemption, and the outcry for clemency from various individuals and organizations, Bush refused to block Tucker’s execution and, at the age of 38, she was put to death by lethal injection on February 3, 1998.
Her execution generated extensive media coverage and discussions about the use and fairness of the death penalty. She was the first woman to be executed in the United States since 1984, and the first in Texas since 1863.
Bush asked only two questions when considering commuting Tucker’s death sentence: Was there any doubt of her guilt? Did she have the full access to the protections of the law?
Using the Bush two-question-test, Tucker’s execution would not be halted, but there are many on Texas death row today that would fail and should be given a new trial, at the very least, using modern standards of evidence and developments in DNA testing.
One such example is Robert Roberson who was convicted of killing his own two-year-old daughter on the basis of “shaken baby syndrome,” a child abuse theory that is considered to be junk science.
On February 1, 2002, Roberson's daughter Nikki was ill with pneumonia and had a fever of 104.5 the night she collapsed. She had also been given medication, which is no longer considered safe for children.
Roberson rushed his daughter to the hospital where she was pronounced dead. Pediatric doctors detected symptoms, including brain swelling, symptoms which at the time were considered to be certain proof of child abuse and violent shaking.
Witnesses and police at the hospital observed what they considered odd behavior from Roberson and thought it inappropriate for a father who should be grieving the death of his daughter. This added to their suspicion that he killed his own daughter.
This behavior was part of the basis for Roberson’s arrest and his prosecution at the 2003 trial.
The jury was told that Roberson was a cold and calculating father who displayed no emotion.
It was only after his conviction and death sentence that Roberson was diagnosed with autism.
What police and witnesses saw was a non-neurotypical response to an overwhelming situation.
This week the U.S. Supreme Court, without comment, rejected Roberson’s request for a new trial that would include updated evidence and testimony that was unavailable at the time of his trial.
Roberson has exhausted all of his appeals and is now waiting for a death date to be set by the Texas prison system.
Under Bush’s two-question-test, there is considerable doubt that Roberson killed his daughter. It’s more likely she died from an illness and wrong medication.
What about question two? Did Roberson have the full access to the protections of the law? One could argue the answer is no since the law offers little to no protection.
When it comes to the death penalty in Texas, the common justification for the ultimate punishment is that the condemned have access to a robust, lengthy and thorough appeal process.
But the record shows that this is a flawed appeal process, which leaves room for errors and miscarriages of justice.
The state's post-conviction review process is often criticized for its inadequacy in addressing claims of innocence or constitutional violations.
The limited access to legal representation and the complexity of the appeals system have resulted in rushed decisions and a failure to adequately examine evidence.
This has led to the execution of individuals whose convictions may not have withstood rigorous scrutiny.
The fact that Texas has had more exonerations than any other state in the country indicates a systemic problem with the application of the death penalty."
Guests: Mark Beaver is author of the book The Ballad of Karla Faye Tucker. Gretchen Sween is Robert Roberson’s attorney. Kristin Houle Cuellar is the executive director of the Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty
The entire story can be read at:
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/
——————————————————
