WEBVTT

1
00:00:16.800 --> 00:00:20.480
<v Speaker 1>Hello, and welcome to the Texas Tribune trip cast for Tuesday,

2
00:00:20.679 --> 00:00:24.079
<v Speaker 1>October fourteenth. I am Matthew Watkins, editor in chief of

3
00:00:24.120 --> 00:00:28.280
<v Speaker 1>the Texas Tribune, joined as usual by Politics and Justice

4
00:00:28.320 --> 00:00:29.679
<v Speaker 1>reporter Eleanor Klebanoff.

5
00:00:30.079 --> 00:00:33.240
<v Speaker 2>Hell, still not my title, Law and.

6
00:00:33.240 --> 00:00:36.679
<v Speaker 1>Politics, Law in politics, politics, justice.

7
00:00:36.439 --> 00:00:39.840
<v Speaker 3>Politics, the you know, law and order and CSI and

8
00:00:40.159 --> 00:00:42.119
<v Speaker 3>justice politics reporter.

9
00:00:42.399 --> 00:00:44.479
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. I will get it at some point, or maybe

10
00:00:44.479 --> 00:00:47.399
<v Speaker 1>I won't. Yeah, maybe not. Keeps working. How are you doing.

11
00:00:48.159 --> 00:00:51.200
<v Speaker 2>I'm doing well. And there's a real full chill in

12
00:00:51.240 --> 00:00:51.479
<v Speaker 2>the air.

13
00:00:51.520 --> 00:00:52.759
<v Speaker 1>Oh yeah, low nineties.

14
00:00:52.840 --> 00:00:53.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's amazing.

15
00:00:54.600 --> 00:00:56.840
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I really enjoyed that at acl Fest.

16
00:00:57.119 --> 00:00:59.719
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, were you at a cl I was, and.

17
00:01:02.320 --> 00:01:05.200
<v Speaker 1>I continue to be too old for them. I only

18
00:01:05.239 --> 00:01:09.359
<v Speaker 1>went on Saturday with my daughter and my wife. Daughter

19
00:01:09.519 --> 00:01:14.640
<v Speaker 1>very excited to see Sabrina Carpenter. I went and saw

20
00:01:14.640 --> 00:01:20.439
<v Speaker 1>the Strokes because, as previously mentioned, I'm old, and yeah, yes,

21
00:01:20.959 --> 00:01:21.719
<v Speaker 1>it was a great time.

22
00:01:21.799 --> 00:01:23.799
<v Speaker 3>You just threw your daughter into the Sabrina crowd and

23
00:01:23.799 --> 00:01:26.079
<v Speaker 3>we're like, we'll meet back at A at the end.

24
00:01:26.239 --> 00:01:29.359
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Well, so basically, my daughter had a soccer game

25
00:01:29.400 --> 00:01:32.560
<v Speaker 1>at eight am in San Antonio, so we had to

26
00:01:32.560 --> 00:01:35.239
<v Speaker 1>wake up at six and driver to San Antonio and

27
00:01:35.280 --> 00:01:37.280
<v Speaker 1>then we drove back and then we got to the

28
00:01:37.319 --> 00:01:43.040
<v Speaker 1>festival at around two two thirty and then got ended

29
00:01:43.120 --> 00:01:45.079
<v Speaker 1>up getting home around like midnight. So it was an

30
00:01:45.079 --> 00:01:47.480
<v Speaker 1>incredibly long day and my daughter was like, this is

31
00:01:47.519 --> 00:01:49.959
<v Speaker 1>too much. So they like actually like stayed back and

32
00:01:50.000 --> 00:01:54.519
<v Speaker 1>worked in the mix. I was watching the Strokes and

33
00:01:54.560 --> 00:01:57.000
<v Speaker 1>also watching the texting and football game on my phone.

34
00:01:57.079 --> 00:02:01.439
<v Speaker 3>Yes, fair, fair, like whole is like the first part

35
00:02:01.519 --> 00:02:03.879
<v Speaker 3>so beautiful, like getting to share a music festival with

36
00:02:03.920 --> 00:02:04.359
<v Speaker 3>your child.

37
00:02:04.519 --> 00:02:04.920
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

38
00:02:05.000 --> 00:02:08.520
<v Speaker 3>The setup of after driving her at six am to

39
00:02:08.599 --> 00:02:12.039
<v Speaker 3>a soccer game is like a real mixed bag on parenthood.

40
00:02:13.120 --> 00:02:15.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah you know. And then she was like convinced that

41
00:02:15.400 --> 00:02:17.479
<v Speaker 1>she had lung cancer because of all the people who

42
00:02:17.520 --> 00:02:20.159
<v Speaker 1>were smoking. And I was like, actually, that pain you

43
00:02:20.159 --> 00:02:22.240
<v Speaker 1>feel on your legs is actually all the dust.

44
00:02:22.159 --> 00:02:24.159
<v Speaker 3>Right, yeah, you're like you can smoke a ton, don't

45
00:02:24.199 --> 00:02:27.800
<v Speaker 3>even more like honestly, the smoking's not the profitable Yeah.

46
00:02:27.960 --> 00:02:30.240
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so anyway, nice.

47
00:02:30.319 --> 00:02:32.039
<v Speaker 3>I did not go to a cl this year, but

48
00:02:33.080 --> 00:02:35.039
<v Speaker 3>most I was most would have gone to see Tea Pain.

49
00:02:35.560 --> 00:02:38.759
<v Speaker 1>So I went to the first ten ACL fests and

50
00:02:38.800 --> 00:02:41.439
<v Speaker 1>then I retired, So I was like, this is too

51
00:02:41.879 --> 00:02:45.439
<v Speaker 1>it's too much, and then I went enough since then

52
00:02:45.560 --> 00:02:46.960
<v Speaker 1>to forget how terrible it is.

53
00:02:47.039 --> 00:02:50.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, every time it's a new Yeah, Yeah, it was.

54
00:02:50.080 --> 00:02:52.759
<v Speaker 1>Actually pretty fun. Japanese Breakfast actually was the best show

55
00:02:53.879 --> 00:02:55.680
<v Speaker 1>with that band. Yeah, really great.

56
00:02:55.879 --> 00:02:56.039
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

57
00:02:56.120 --> 00:02:58.240
<v Speaker 4>Did you go to IC I did. I had a

58
00:02:58.360 --> 00:03:01.400
<v Speaker 4>very chaotic experience. I did not have tickets, so me

59
00:03:01.439 --> 00:03:05.560
<v Speaker 4>and my friends got their Sunday at four pm and

60
00:03:06.080 --> 00:03:10.159
<v Speaker 4>I held up a sign that said need four wristbands.

61
00:03:11.479 --> 00:03:12.280
<v Speaker 2>Had they were quo.

62
00:03:12.400 --> 00:03:15.960
<v Speaker 4>The scalpers were quoting us like four hundred dollars for

63
00:03:17.199 --> 00:03:19.439
<v Speaker 4>like five hours left of the vessel, So we posted

64
00:03:19.520 --> 00:03:22.400
<v Speaker 4>up at lose and I held up my sign. Eventually

65
00:03:22.400 --> 00:03:24.199
<v Speaker 4>did manage to get too, so I went in and

66
00:03:24.240 --> 00:03:27.000
<v Speaker 4>saw two DJs.

67
00:03:27.000 --> 00:03:27.520
<v Speaker 1>Interesting.

68
00:03:28.240 --> 00:03:30.639
<v Speaker 2>I will say I've said it before, I'll say it again. Kala,

69
00:03:30.680 --> 00:03:31.599
<v Speaker 2>We're very different people.

70
00:03:33.159 --> 00:03:38.879
<v Speaker 1>That voice you heard was indeed Kala Glow are politics reporter. Yes,

71
00:03:39.439 --> 00:03:39.680
<v Speaker 1>I know.

72
00:03:39.759 --> 00:03:43.120
<v Speaker 2>Kayla's more straightforward, yeah, fancy.

73
00:03:43.039 --> 00:03:46.039
<v Speaker 1>But this week she is here to talk to us

74
00:03:46.120 --> 00:03:50.599
<v Speaker 1>about Robert Roberson, who was at least coming into this

75
00:03:50.680 --> 00:03:53.360
<v Speaker 1>week when we scheduled this podcast scheduled to be put

76
00:03:53.400 --> 00:03:56.120
<v Speaker 1>to death by the State of Texas for the two

77
00:03:56.159 --> 00:04:00.759
<v Speaker 1>thousand and three conviction for killing his daughter. His case,

78
00:04:00.879 --> 00:04:03.159
<v Speaker 1>as you may know, has become a high profile cause

79
00:04:03.199 --> 00:04:06.080
<v Speaker 1>for death PILNY opponents who believe Texas might be trying

80
00:04:06.120 --> 00:04:11.120
<v Speaker 1>to execute an innocent man. But on Thursday, the state's

81
00:04:11.159 --> 00:04:14.360
<v Speaker 1>highest criminal court delayed the execution for the second time

82
00:04:14.439 --> 00:04:16.160
<v Speaker 1>in less than a year. It was a second time

83
00:04:16.199 --> 00:04:18.439
<v Speaker 1>in less than a year that Robson was essentially days

84
00:04:18.480 --> 00:04:21.199
<v Speaker 1>away from being executed and a court stepped in to

85
00:04:21.279 --> 00:04:25.319
<v Speaker 1>block it all. Through this whole process, really, this whole

86
00:04:25.360 --> 00:04:28.439
<v Speaker 1>past year, some of Texas's highest profile politicians have been

87
00:04:28.439 --> 00:04:31.399
<v Speaker 1>fighting over the Robson case, in a fight that sort

88
00:04:31.439 --> 00:04:36.759
<v Speaker 1>of breaks down under sort of non ideological lines. It's

89
00:04:36.759 --> 00:04:39.439
<v Speaker 1>been sort of an interesting mix of lawmakers on both

90
00:04:39.480 --> 00:04:43.199
<v Speaker 1>sides of the issue. But I will speak for myself.

91
00:04:43.240 --> 00:04:45.480
<v Speaker 1>I won't speak for you Eleanor, but at least for myself.

92
00:04:45.759 --> 00:04:47.959
<v Speaker 1>As this fight has been going on, it's been a

93
00:04:48.000 --> 00:04:51.319
<v Speaker 1>bit challenging to sort of make sense of the facts.

94
00:04:51.920 --> 00:04:56.680
<v Speaker 1>I would say both sides seem very certain and confident

95
00:04:56.800 --> 00:05:01.000
<v Speaker 1>in their position as to whether Robert Roberson did this. So, Kayla,

96
00:05:01.120 --> 00:05:03.079
<v Speaker 1>you are here to break it down for us. Thank

97
00:05:03.079 --> 00:05:04.680
<v Speaker 1>you for joining us on the podcast.

98
00:05:04.720 --> 00:05:05.600
<v Speaker 4>Thanks for having me.

99
00:05:05.560 --> 00:05:09.560
<v Speaker 1>Even after an eventful ACL festival. So let's just start

100
00:05:09.560 --> 00:05:12.839
<v Speaker 1>with the basics here. Can you tell us about the

101
00:05:12.920 --> 00:05:15.079
<v Speaker 1>crime that Roverson is accused of.

102
00:05:15.560 --> 00:05:19.399
<v Speaker 4>Yes, he is accused and was convicted of murdering his

103
00:05:19.439 --> 00:05:23.000
<v Speaker 4>two year old daughter, Nicki. He was convicted in two

104
00:05:23.040 --> 00:05:25.879
<v Speaker 4>thousand and three. She died in two thousand and two

105
00:05:26.560 --> 00:05:29.120
<v Speaker 4>and at the time when he brought her to the hospital,

106
00:05:29.240 --> 00:05:31.399
<v Speaker 4>the nurses and doctors he had said that he had

107
00:05:31.480 --> 00:05:34.920
<v Speaker 4>woken to find her fallen from the bed and she

108
00:05:35.000 --> 00:05:37.920
<v Speaker 4>was unresponsive, but he didn't know what was going on.

109
00:05:38.600 --> 00:05:40.480
<v Speaker 4>She had been really sick in the weeks leading up

110
00:05:40.519 --> 00:05:42.879
<v Speaker 4>to that, but at the hospital, the doctors and nurses

111
00:05:42.920 --> 00:05:45.879
<v Speaker 4>didn't think that, you know, a fall could have caused this,

112
00:05:46.040 --> 00:05:48.600
<v Speaker 4>and so they saw the signs that at the time

113
00:05:48.680 --> 00:05:51.680
<v Speaker 4>told them to diagnose her with shaken baby syndrome, which

114
00:05:51.720 --> 00:05:54.480
<v Speaker 4>is basically when a child or a baby is shaken

115
00:05:54.519 --> 00:05:58.040
<v Speaker 4>so violently that they are really injured or die. So

116
00:05:58.079 --> 00:06:00.959
<v Speaker 4>that is what he was convicted of in two thousand

117
00:06:00.959 --> 00:06:04.399
<v Speaker 4>and three. He has maintained his innocence over the past

118
00:06:04.480 --> 00:06:09.279
<v Speaker 4>twenty plus years on death row. But you know, even

119
00:06:09.279 --> 00:06:13.079
<v Speaker 4>at his trial, his defense layer didn't pursue that innocence claim.

120
00:06:13.120 --> 00:06:16.160
<v Speaker 4>Didn't you know, defend him as if believing that he

121
00:06:16.240 --> 00:06:20.600
<v Speaker 4>were innocent. And so now you know, medical consensus has evolved.

122
00:06:20.639 --> 00:06:24.160
<v Speaker 4>His lawyers have presented evidence they say debunks that Jake

123
00:06:24.240 --> 00:06:27.279
<v Speaker 4>and baby diagnosis and that there was no crime.

124
00:06:27.639 --> 00:06:31.759
<v Speaker 1>Okay, let's let's get into that. Now, why do people

125
00:06:32.800 --> 00:06:36.639
<v Speaker 1>believe Why do the people who believe he's innocent believe

126
00:06:36.639 --> 00:06:37.279
<v Speaker 1>he is innocent?

127
00:06:38.079 --> 00:06:39.639
<v Speaker 2>There is a lot.

128
00:06:39.959 --> 00:06:43.240
<v Speaker 4>So in the midst of all this, Texas in twenty

129
00:06:43.319 --> 00:06:48.040
<v Speaker 4>thirteen passes a pretty groundbreaking law, the Junk Science Law.

130
00:06:48.480 --> 00:06:50.000
<v Speaker 4>Texas was the first in the nation to do. A

131
00:06:50.040 --> 00:06:53.160
<v Speaker 4>bunch of states have followed suit, and that provides for

132
00:06:53.560 --> 00:06:57.480
<v Speaker 4>second looks in cases where the conviction rested on science

133
00:06:57.480 --> 00:07:00.560
<v Speaker 4>that has since been discredited and recognizes that while the

134
00:07:00.639 --> 00:07:03.879
<v Speaker 4>law is final, and you know, convictions are final, science

135
00:07:03.920 --> 00:07:08.399
<v Speaker 4>and evidence evolves, like you think of things like my

136
00:07:08.800 --> 00:07:11.319
<v Speaker 4>bite mark hypotheses. You know, people used to think that

137
00:07:11.360 --> 00:07:14.040
<v Speaker 4>you can match someone's teeth up to a bitemark, and

138
00:07:14.079 --> 00:07:16.360
<v Speaker 4>that is just not like held up in science anymore.

139
00:07:16.600 --> 00:07:19.600
<v Speaker 4>So we pass this law in twenty thirteen that Roberson

140
00:07:19.680 --> 00:07:23.480
<v Speaker 4>supporters think he is the poster child for to receive

141
00:07:23.560 --> 00:07:27.480
<v Speaker 4>relief under and so a few things have happened since

142
00:07:27.480 --> 00:07:31.399
<v Speaker 4>then as well. The medical guidance doesn't say to diagnose

143
00:07:31.439 --> 00:07:36.160
<v Speaker 4>shake and baby syndrome when the three symptoms that it

144
00:07:36.240 --> 00:07:39.879
<v Speaker 4>previously said to do it appear for it says you

145
00:07:39.959 --> 00:07:44.879
<v Speaker 4>have to consider other factors before concluding abuse. His lawyers

146
00:07:44.959 --> 00:07:49.680
<v Speaker 4>argue that things like sicknesses, accidents, those can call cause

147
00:07:49.759 --> 00:07:52.920
<v Speaker 4>these three symptoms as well. It's bleeding behind the retina,

148
00:07:54.240 --> 00:07:55.519
<v Speaker 4>some things in the brain.

149
00:07:56.759 --> 00:07:58.759
<v Speaker 2>Swelling, yeah, bleeding.

150
00:08:00.079 --> 00:08:02.439
<v Speaker 4>And so the medical consensus around how to diagnose shake

151
00:08:02.439 --> 00:08:04.759
<v Speaker 4>and baby syndrome. It's still real, you know, but baby

152
00:08:04.800 --> 00:08:08.199
<v Speaker 4>can still be really injured if they're violently shaken. Today

153
00:08:08.199 --> 00:08:11.000
<v Speaker 4>it's not called chicken baby syndrome anymore, but how to

154
00:08:11.040 --> 00:08:15.800
<v Speaker 4>diagnosis that guidance has changed. And his lawyers also point

155
00:08:15.839 --> 00:08:20.600
<v Speaker 4>to evidence about Nikki that wasn't considered at trial as closely,

156
00:08:22.040 --> 00:08:24.000
<v Speaker 4>that she was, you know, really sick in the days

157
00:08:24.079 --> 00:08:27.560
<v Speaker 4>leading up to it, that she was prescribed medication that's

158
00:08:27.600 --> 00:08:30.959
<v Speaker 4>no longer given to children her age, and they also

159
00:08:31.079 --> 00:08:35.240
<v Speaker 4>point to flaws with how the autopsy was conducted, things

160
00:08:35.279 --> 00:08:39.000
<v Speaker 4>with how Niki was handled at the hospital. So there

161
00:08:39.000 --> 00:08:42.399
<v Speaker 4>are just a bunch of different, evolving, shifting things that

162
00:08:42.440 --> 00:08:45.519
<v Speaker 4>have led people to say that it's not totally clear

163
00:08:45.600 --> 00:08:48.159
<v Speaker 4>that he shook his baby to death and should be

164
00:08:48.200 --> 00:08:49.039
<v Speaker 4>executed for it.

165
00:08:49.559 --> 00:08:52.159
<v Speaker 3>Right, there's sort of like correct, been wrong, right, but

166
00:08:52.200 --> 00:08:53.919
<v Speaker 3>like two separate things here, one of which is like

167
00:08:53.960 --> 00:08:56.840
<v Speaker 3>the actual facts of his specific case. And also, as

168
00:08:56.840 --> 00:09:00.960
<v Speaker 3>you're saying this like consensus on shaking baby syndrome, that

169
00:09:01.559 --> 00:09:04.759
<v Speaker 3>the junk science law doesn't say, oh, if you were

170
00:09:04.759 --> 00:09:07.919
<v Speaker 3>conviction on something that has since been thrown out as

171
00:09:07.960 --> 00:09:10.080
<v Speaker 3>like you can't possibly have done it. It just says

172
00:09:10.080 --> 00:09:12.080
<v Speaker 3>like you should get a second look at your case

173
00:09:12.240 --> 00:09:16.240
<v Speaker 3>and we'll like reassess it on modern medicine, And a

174
00:09:16.240 --> 00:09:18.759
<v Speaker 3>big part of that is like the idea that what

175
00:09:18.840 --> 00:09:22.120
<v Speaker 3>we now know is doctors used to be told, like

176
00:09:22.159 --> 00:09:24.919
<v Speaker 3>pediatricians especially like if you see or like if you

177
00:09:24.960 --> 00:09:29.519
<v Speaker 3>see these three symptoms the triad, like assume it's shaken

178
00:09:29.559 --> 00:09:33.279
<v Speaker 3>baby syndrome and proceed from there, which sort of his

179
00:09:33.440 --> 00:09:34.840
<v Speaker 3>lawyers of art you sort of like taint the whole

180
00:09:34.840 --> 00:09:37.440
<v Speaker 3>thing from the jump. We now know that a lot

181
00:09:37.440 --> 00:09:40.000
<v Speaker 3>of things can cause that, and that you know, often

182
00:09:40.399 --> 00:09:43.200
<v Speaker 3>to shake a baby so hard to cause them to die,

183
00:09:43.679 --> 00:09:45.519
<v Speaker 3>you might see other symptoms too, like a broken neck.

184
00:09:45.639 --> 00:09:48.799
<v Speaker 2>Sure, exactly, Yeah, yeah.

185
00:09:48.480 --> 00:09:51.000
<v Speaker 1>It's it's well, actually, I want to go back a

186
00:09:51.039 --> 00:09:54.600
<v Speaker 1>little bit and more into the arguments on both sides here,

187
00:09:54.639 --> 00:09:58.320
<v Speaker 1>but let's kind of continue with our history lesson first. Right,

188
00:09:58.440 --> 00:10:03.039
<v Speaker 1>So he was is scheduled to be executed last year,

189
00:10:03.679 --> 00:10:09.240
<v Speaker 1>and two state lawmakers really took up his cause. Jeff Leech,

190
00:10:09.279 --> 00:10:13.840
<v Speaker 1>a Republican from the Colin County area north of Dallas,

191
00:10:14.159 --> 00:10:19.039
<v Speaker 1>and Joe Moody, a Democrat from the Alpaso area, tell

192
00:10:19.120 --> 00:10:24.399
<v Speaker 1>us a little bit about the dramatic actions they took

193
00:10:24.480 --> 00:10:28.000
<v Speaker 1>to block the execution the first time here last year.

194
00:10:28.200 --> 00:10:30.600
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, well, I just want to note this was not

195
00:10:30.840 --> 00:10:33.039
<v Speaker 4>last year, was not the first time his execution was blocked.

196
00:10:33.559 --> 00:10:37.279
<v Speaker 4>The Court of Criminal Appeals in twenty sixteen actually stayed

197
00:10:37.279 --> 00:10:40.240
<v Speaker 4>his execution using the junk science law, saying that it

198
00:10:40.919 --> 00:10:43.120
<v Speaker 4>provided a second look. So his case went back to

199
00:10:43.159 --> 00:10:46.840
<v Speaker 4>trial court that had an evidentiure hearing. But the court

200
00:10:46.840 --> 00:10:49.720
<v Speaker 4>in Anderson County and the prosecutor, you know, maintained that

201
00:10:49.720 --> 00:10:52.080
<v Speaker 4>the evidence was still convincing of his guilt, and so

202
00:10:52.200 --> 00:10:54.600
<v Speaker 4>that's what they recommended to the CCA, and the CCA

203
00:10:54.679 --> 00:10:57.720
<v Speaker 4>agreed Robertson's lawyer thinks that, you know, they never really

204
00:10:57.720 --> 00:11:00.480
<v Speaker 4>meaningfully engaged with all the evidence she brought up, but

205
00:11:00.600 --> 00:11:04.039
<v Speaker 4>that sort of covers the span between twenty sixteen up

206
00:11:04.120 --> 00:11:07.600
<v Speaker 4>until twenty twenty three. Is when his execution data set

207
00:11:07.679 --> 00:11:11.200
<v Speaker 4>for twenty three four last year, which is when all

208
00:11:11.240 --> 00:11:15.720
<v Speaker 4>these lawmakers get involved and sort of set off this broader,

209
00:11:15.840 --> 00:11:20.799
<v Speaker 4>more dramatic saga, political saga. I think it was in

210
00:11:20.840 --> 00:11:24.159
<v Speaker 4>the month before his execution was set to take place,

211
00:11:24.639 --> 00:11:27.080
<v Speaker 4>more than half I think it was something like two

212
00:11:27.120 --> 00:11:31.600
<v Speaker 4>thirds of the Texas House sign onto a letter urging clemency.

213
00:11:31.639 --> 00:11:33.919
<v Speaker 4>A few people have since walked back their support, like

214
00:11:33.960 --> 00:11:38.639
<v Speaker 4>Tom wulliverson Briscoecine. But these lawmakers, you know, they were

215
00:11:38.679 --> 00:11:42.120
<v Speaker 4>suggesting that maybe there was sufficient doubt to put a

216
00:11:42.159 --> 00:11:47.799
<v Speaker 4>pause on the whole thing. The House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence,

217
00:11:47.799 --> 00:11:50.399
<v Speaker 4>which at the time Joe Moody chaired, and I believe

218
00:11:50.480 --> 00:11:53.559
<v Speaker 4>Jeff Leach was the vice chair at the time, they

219
00:11:53.600 --> 00:11:55.879
<v Speaker 4>held a couple of hearings before the execution was set

220
00:11:55.960 --> 00:11:58.759
<v Speaker 4>to happen, and then the most dramatic moment happened the

221
00:11:58.840 --> 00:12:02.000
<v Speaker 4>day before Roberson was set to be executed. They brought

222
00:12:02.000 --> 00:12:04.000
<v Speaker 4>in a bunch of experts to testify as an all

223
00:12:04.080 --> 00:12:07.559
<v Speaker 4>day hearing. Sometime in the middle of the day, the

224
00:12:07.600 --> 00:12:09.960
<v Speaker 4>decision came from the Board of Pardons and Paroles that

225
00:12:10.039 --> 00:12:13.360
<v Speaker 4>they were going to reject his application for clemency, which

226
00:12:13.399 --> 00:12:16.080
<v Speaker 4>meant that only Governor Greg Abbott had the power at

227
00:12:16.120 --> 00:12:20.080
<v Speaker 4>the time to issue a thirty day stay, which he

228
00:12:20.120 --> 00:12:23.440
<v Speaker 4>did not do. At the end of this long, all

229
00:12:23.559 --> 00:12:25.759
<v Speaker 4>day hearing, the committee, I believe it was a motion

230
00:12:25.840 --> 00:12:28.759
<v Speaker 4>by Representative Brian Harrison, who's a Republican from Midlothian.

231
00:12:29.279 --> 00:12:30.879
<v Speaker 2>He raises this motion to.

232
00:12:31.000 --> 00:12:36.519
<v Speaker 4>Subpoena Robert Robertson, instructing him to come testify before the

233
00:12:36.559 --> 00:12:40.240
<v Speaker 4>committee a few days after he was scheduled to die.

234
00:12:40.440 --> 00:12:43.799
<v Speaker 4>So that sets off a whole whirlwinds the next day,

235
00:12:45.799 --> 00:12:48.559
<v Speaker 4>and eventually the Texas Supreme Court steps in saying that

236
00:12:48.679 --> 00:12:53.440
<v Speaker 4>this is a separation of powers issue between the executive

237
00:12:53.440 --> 00:12:56.279
<v Speaker 4>and legislative branches of government. So the subpoena went out,

238
00:12:56.360 --> 00:12:59.600
<v Speaker 4>or the executive branch's authority to execute him went out,

239
00:13:00.159 --> 00:13:04.399
<v Speaker 4>and that leads to his execution being temporarily stayed, and

240
00:13:04.440 --> 00:13:07.360
<v Speaker 4>eventually the Supreme Court says the lawmakers stepped a little

241
00:13:07.360 --> 00:13:11.480
<v Speaker 4>bit too far, and Robert's execution was put back on

242
00:13:11.519 --> 00:13:15.440
<v Speaker 4>the calendar this year and until last week was set

243
00:13:15.440 --> 00:13:18.480
<v Speaker 4>to happen in two days from Luma recording and.

244
00:13:18.440 --> 00:13:21.039
<v Speaker 1>The idea back then there was essentially, you can't execute

245
00:13:21.039 --> 00:13:26.000
<v Speaker 1>someone who we're asking to come testify before us Abbot.

246
00:13:25.720 --> 00:13:29.240
<v Speaker 3>Where you can't testify if you've been executed, so right, right, right.

247
00:13:29.039 --> 00:13:31.879
<v Speaker 1>You can't. You can't execute We need him to, yeah,

248
00:13:31.879 --> 00:13:36.480
<v Speaker 1>get in, so so don't don't And Abbott and others

249
00:13:36.559 --> 00:13:38.639
<v Speaker 1>basically essentially make the case that this is sort of

250
00:13:38.679 --> 00:13:42.799
<v Speaker 1>a they are taking away the power of the governor

251
00:13:44.679 --> 00:13:47.480
<v Speaker 1>to kind of make decisions on these, when it's essentially the.

252
00:13:47.799 --> 00:13:50.440
<v Speaker 3>Right anyone could subpoena anyone then and say, you know,

253
00:13:50.480 --> 00:13:52.679
<v Speaker 3>we're never going to execute anybody.

254
00:13:52.639 --> 00:13:56.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, okay. So then the decision from the State Criminal

255
00:13:56.480 --> 00:13:59.159
<v Speaker 1>Court of Appeals, we should mention a nine member court

256
00:13:59.399 --> 00:14:03.440
<v Speaker 1>all republics, all elected statewide, that focus on basically the

257
00:14:03.480 --> 00:14:09.720
<v Speaker 1>top criminal court in the state, issues a decision on Thursday.

258
00:14:10.000 --> 00:14:11.960
<v Speaker 1>Tell us what that decision said.

259
00:14:12.279 --> 00:14:15.200
<v Speaker 4>That decision it so, first of all, it didn't roll

260
00:14:15.240 --> 00:14:19.600
<v Speaker 4>on the merits of Robertson's claims that you know, this

261
00:14:19.720 --> 00:14:21.480
<v Speaker 4>was junk science, or that Nikki.

262
00:14:21.200 --> 00:14:22.360
<v Speaker 2>Died from other causes.

263
00:14:23.799 --> 00:14:27.120
<v Speaker 4>In fact, dismissed a bunch of his appeals claiming judicial

264
00:14:27.120 --> 00:14:31.120
<v Speaker 4>misconduct and other things, but it told the trial court

265
00:14:31.120 --> 00:14:34.759
<v Speaker 4>in Anderson County to look again at Robert's case in

266
00:14:34.919 --> 00:14:38.559
<v Speaker 4>light of a decision the criminal court made last year.

267
00:14:39.639 --> 00:14:42.240
<v Speaker 4>So in the midst of all the subpoenas stuff going on,

268
00:14:42.399 --> 00:14:47.039
<v Speaker 4>and the Court of Criminal Appeals overturned the conviction of

269
00:14:47.080 --> 00:14:49.759
<v Speaker 4>a man out of Dallas County who was convicted based

270
00:14:49.799 --> 00:14:53.639
<v Speaker 4>on a shaken baby syndrome diagnosis. In that decision, the

271
00:14:53.759 --> 00:14:57.159
<v Speaker 4>Court of Criminal Appeals, you know, acknowledged that these science

272
00:14:57.240 --> 00:15:01.320
<v Speaker 4>and medical consensus around shaking baby syndrome had evolved since

273
00:15:01.360 --> 00:15:05.639
<v Speaker 4>that conviction, and so they overturned that guy's connection. His

274
00:15:05.720 --> 00:15:10.919
<v Speaker 4>name was Andrew work Is, Andrew Worke, and Roberts attorneys

275
00:15:10.919 --> 00:15:13.120
<v Speaker 4>had been, you know, citing that case as if you're

276
00:15:13.240 --> 00:15:17.159
<v Speaker 4>going to acknowledge changing science in Andrew Worke's case, we

277
00:15:17.200 --> 00:15:20.720
<v Speaker 4>think it should apply here as well. His attorney. Robert's attorney,

278
00:15:20.759 --> 00:15:25.720
<v Speaker 4>Gretchen Schwen called the cases materially indistinguishable, and so that

279
00:15:25.759 --> 00:15:28.639
<v Speaker 4>had been a point in her filings to the court

280
00:15:28.720 --> 00:15:32.320
<v Speaker 4>since then. And so on Thursday, the CCA told the

281
00:15:32.399 --> 00:15:35.639
<v Speaker 4>trial court to look at Robertson's case again in light

282
00:15:35.679 --> 00:15:38.320
<v Speaker 4>of that particular decision. It didn't say, you know, this

283
00:15:38.360 --> 00:15:40.600
<v Speaker 4>is a junkt science. It didn't say there are a

284
00:15:40.600 --> 00:15:42.279
<v Speaker 4>lot of things wrong with us. It just said, since

285
00:15:42.320 --> 00:15:44.559
<v Speaker 4>we've made that decision, we want you to look at

286
00:15:44.559 --> 00:15:47.240
<v Speaker 4>this again in line of that. And so now you know,

287
00:15:47.440 --> 00:15:49.919
<v Speaker 4>things will happen on the trial court level in Anderson County,

288
00:15:49.960 --> 00:15:53.080
<v Speaker 4>and whether Robertson gets a new trial at the end

289
00:15:53.120 --> 00:15:55.320
<v Speaker 4>of it is sort of tbd.

290
00:15:55.080 --> 00:15:57.879
<v Speaker 1>But right, So they didn't necessarily order a new trial.

291
00:15:57.919 --> 00:16:02.120
<v Speaker 1>They said review on this sort of precedent we set

292
00:16:02.519 --> 00:16:03.960
<v Speaker 1>in a previous case, exactly.

293
00:16:04.360 --> 00:16:07.799
<v Speaker 3>And at this point, so currently, right, the Attorney General's

294
00:16:07.799 --> 00:16:11.240
<v Speaker 3>office has sort of stepped in to Anderson County to say,

295
00:16:11.240 --> 00:16:15.200
<v Speaker 3>like they're taking the role of Anderson County and defending this.

296
00:16:15.320 --> 00:16:18.240
<v Speaker 3>And as we know, Attorney General Ki Paxton has been very,

297
00:16:18.320 --> 00:16:23.000
<v Speaker 3>very outspoken about the idea that Robertson should be executed

298
00:16:23.039 --> 00:16:24.320
<v Speaker 3>for this. Yes, that's right.

299
00:16:25.519 --> 00:16:27.840
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk a little bit about the argument being

300
00:16:27.919 --> 00:16:34.840
<v Speaker 1>made by people like Attorney General Kim Paxton that you know,

301
00:16:35.200 --> 00:16:38.600
<v Speaker 1>Mitch Little Estate representative, another person really pushing this case

302
00:16:38.679 --> 00:16:42.360
<v Speaker 1>that essentially, you know, people portraying people in the media,

303
00:16:42.480 --> 00:16:45.639
<v Speaker 1>people who are in the legislature who are trying to

304
00:16:45.679 --> 00:16:48.200
<v Speaker 1>defend him, lawyers are trying to portray this as some

305
00:16:48.279 --> 00:16:51.600
<v Speaker 1>kind of open and shut case when the evidence actually

306
00:16:51.679 --> 00:16:59.240
<v Speaker 1>points to a clear you know, guilt of Roberson, right, like.

307
00:16:59.240 --> 00:17:00.360
<v Speaker 2>A murder would walk free.

308
00:17:00.600 --> 00:17:05.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Yeah, And I wanted to see if you can

309
00:17:05.519 --> 00:17:09.359
<v Speaker 1>help me sort of think through what some of the cases.

310
00:17:09.359 --> 00:17:13.319
<v Speaker 1>And I'll warn here, you know, we might go into

311
00:17:13.319 --> 00:17:17.319
<v Speaker 1>the realm of fairly graphic details here so of you know,

312
00:17:17.359 --> 00:17:19.880
<v Speaker 1>a very young child, So people don't want to listen

313
00:17:19.880 --> 00:17:22.799
<v Speaker 1>to this. You might want to skip ahead or wait,

314
00:17:23.079 --> 00:17:27.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, move on to next week to San Antonio. Yeah,

315
00:17:27.559 --> 00:17:31.599
<v Speaker 1>but essentially what we have here is is, you know,

316
00:17:31.759 --> 00:17:35.240
<v Speaker 1>I think the biggest one pointing to well, actually, let

317
00:17:35.240 --> 00:17:37.039
<v Speaker 1>me let me just read from the descent in the

318
00:17:37.119 --> 00:17:39.640
<v Speaker 1>Quarter of Criminal Appeals case, it says the morning after

319
00:17:39.799 --> 00:17:43.559
<v Speaker 1>he being Robertson brought her being Nicki to the emergency room,

320
00:17:43.559 --> 00:17:46.799
<v Speaker 1>where she was found to be limp lifeless, blue and bruised.

321
00:17:47.079 --> 00:17:49.559
<v Speaker 1>Her pupils were fixed and dilated in the back of

322
00:17:49.599 --> 00:17:54.559
<v Speaker 1>her head, exhibited a boggy, mushy bump. Applicants gave inconsistent

323
00:17:54.559 --> 00:17:58.200
<v Speaker 1>accounts for Nicky's condition, centering around a possible fall from

324
00:17:58.200 --> 00:18:01.640
<v Speaker 1>a bed, an explanation the the medical professionals found at

325
00:18:01.640 --> 00:18:05.920
<v Speaker 1>odds with her condition. She died days later after life

326
00:18:05.960 --> 00:18:09.079
<v Speaker 1>support had been withdrawn. You know, the argument that folks

327
00:18:09.160 --> 00:18:12.880
<v Speaker 1>are making is essentially, when you hear that kind of injuries,

328
00:18:13.559 --> 00:18:17.279
<v Speaker 1>this is not the case of you know, medicine making

329
00:18:17.319 --> 00:18:20.640
<v Speaker 1>someone sick and eventually dying or any of these types

330
00:18:20.680 --> 00:18:24.480
<v Speaker 1>of things. Is that he clearly abused her or bruises

331
00:18:24.519 --> 00:18:30.319
<v Speaker 1>all over her leading to her death. What do Robson's

332
00:18:30.480 --> 00:18:33.559
<v Speaker 1>supporters have to say about that case.

333
00:18:34.319 --> 00:18:36.759
<v Speaker 4>I think they have answers to all those points, and

334
00:18:36.799 --> 00:18:39.519
<v Speaker 4>that's sort of the whole. I think people try to

335
00:18:40.240 --> 00:18:42.759
<v Speaker 4>or trying to make conclusions where that's not what anyone's

336
00:18:42.799 --> 00:18:46.920
<v Speaker 4>asking the court at this or was asking the court

337
00:18:46.960 --> 00:18:49.119
<v Speaker 4>to do before he was scheduled to execute. I mean,

338
00:18:49.160 --> 00:18:56.000
<v Speaker 4>I think they'll say so. Something that advocates for moving

339
00:18:56.039 --> 00:18:58.599
<v Speaker 4>ahead with the execution often point to, I think is

340
00:18:58.640 --> 00:19:03.119
<v Speaker 4>her autopsy report, in addition to some you know, images

341
00:19:03.160 --> 00:19:06.200
<v Speaker 4>of her and those exact descriptions that you mentioned Matthew.

342
00:19:07.720 --> 00:19:10.039
<v Speaker 4>I think his lawyers would say the autopsy itself was

343
00:19:10.079 --> 00:19:14.279
<v Speaker 4>really flawed. The practitioner who conducted it was told before

344
00:19:14.319 --> 00:19:17.559
<v Speaker 4>she conducted the autopsy of Nikki that Robertson had been

345
00:19:19.000 --> 00:19:22.039
<v Speaker 4>arrested on murder charges, which today I think people have

346
00:19:22.160 --> 00:19:26.559
<v Speaker 4>argued would taint the autopsy. I think his lawyers have

347
00:19:26.599 --> 00:19:30.599
<v Speaker 4>also noted that she had a blunt disorder that you know,

348
00:19:30.799 --> 00:19:33.119
<v Speaker 4>was caused by her all the other illnesses that she

349
00:19:33.240 --> 00:19:37.400
<v Speaker 4>had that led her to bruise very easily and led

350
00:19:37.440 --> 00:19:40.440
<v Speaker 4>to those marks that people point to that were reported

351
00:19:40.440 --> 00:19:46.480
<v Speaker 4>in the autopsy. People also suggest that she had clear

352
00:19:46.640 --> 00:19:49.559
<v Speaker 4>signs of blunt force trauma and that's clearly what she

353
00:19:49.640 --> 00:19:53.119
<v Speaker 4>died from, was somebody hitting her. But in the trial record,

354
00:19:53.200 --> 00:19:57.200
<v Speaker 4>the doctors who attended to her testified that blunt force

355
00:19:57.319 --> 00:20:00.880
<v Speaker 4>trauma is indistinguishable from shaking, and so those are sort

356
00:20:00.880 --> 00:20:06.559
<v Speaker 4>of kind of conflated descriptors in her record that people

357
00:20:06.559 --> 00:20:11.920
<v Speaker 4>I think are seizing on and drawing conclusions from. I mean,

358
00:20:11.920 --> 00:20:14.079
<v Speaker 4>they're just like a bunch of things like that. It's

359
00:20:14.119 --> 00:20:20.319
<v Speaker 4>not an easy like if the appeals that his lawyers

360
00:20:20.319 --> 00:20:23.039
<v Speaker 4>have brought are just it's just pages and pages of

361
00:20:23.079 --> 00:20:27.839
<v Speaker 4>medical evaluations, very technical diagnoses and conclusions that they draw

362
00:20:27.839 --> 00:20:31.079
<v Speaker 4>from all these different parts of her condition, and so

363
00:20:32.400 --> 00:20:35.200
<v Speaker 4>I don't think it's so clear cut.

364
00:20:35.440 --> 00:20:37.039
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. I mean, one of the things I'm going to

365
00:20:37.119 --> 00:20:40.720
<v Speaker 1>quote yourself to you. You, I'm going to quote you

366
00:20:40.759 --> 00:20:45.720
<v Speaker 1>to yourself basically, you know, the argument around the medical examiners.

367
00:20:45.759 --> 00:20:48.160
<v Speaker 1>I thought was a really interesting when the medical report,

368
00:20:48.440 --> 00:20:51.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, again describing multiple sites of trauma, bruises all over,

369
00:20:51.400 --> 00:20:54.720
<v Speaker 1>you mentioned the blood condition that might have potentially contributed

370
00:20:54.759 --> 00:20:57.079
<v Speaker 1>to that. You know, one of the things this team

371
00:20:57.240 --> 00:20:59.920
<v Speaker 1>points to is now I'm quoting you. The treating for

372
00:21:00.039 --> 00:21:03.400
<v Speaker 1>ysicians who first saw Nikki did not make note of

373
00:21:03.480 --> 00:21:06.640
<v Speaker 1>multiple sites of physical trauma upon her arrival at the hospital,

374
00:21:07.480 --> 00:21:10.720
<v Speaker 1>since she wasn't admitted with those injuries, and especially because

375
00:21:10.759 --> 00:21:15.160
<v Speaker 1>she had that disorder, It's clear they came from two days.

376
00:21:15.440 --> 00:21:17.559
<v Speaker 1>It's clear that the bruises came from two days of

377
00:21:17.559 --> 00:21:20.920
<v Speaker 1>being picked up, moved, and manipulated during emergency procedures. This

378
00:21:21.000 --> 00:21:23.920
<v Speaker 1>is your You're in that. I'm quoting you, quoting a

379
00:21:23.920 --> 00:21:27.240
<v Speaker 1>group of lawmakers essentially saying that so essentially this idea

380
00:21:27.279 --> 00:21:30.319
<v Speaker 1>of just like what may have happened after she was

381
00:21:30.400 --> 00:21:33.759
<v Speaker 1>rushed to the hospital he possibly is now being blamed for, right,

382
00:21:34.920 --> 00:21:36.640
<v Speaker 1>And let me ask I mean, I know some of

383
00:21:36.640 --> 00:21:39.839
<v Speaker 1>the judges have said in this most recent time, but

384
00:21:39.839 --> 00:21:43.160
<v Speaker 1>also throughout sort of like they're sort of saying, like,

385
00:21:43.400 --> 00:21:44.680
<v Speaker 1>this is not a shaken baby case.

386
00:21:44.720 --> 00:21:47.880
<v Speaker 3>Like the question whether or not shaken baby syndrome is

387
00:21:47.920 --> 00:21:49.720
<v Speaker 3>real or not, or whether they try it all that like,

388
00:21:50.200 --> 00:21:54.440
<v Speaker 3>is not that like there is other evidence that he

389
00:21:54.599 --> 00:21:57.799
<v Speaker 3>brought about her death. That and you know, some of

390
00:21:57.839 --> 00:22:00.759
<v Speaker 3>the one of the jurors testified saying like, well, we

391
00:22:00.839 --> 00:22:02.799
<v Speaker 3>convicted on the premise of shaking baby.

392
00:22:02.839 --> 00:22:05.039
<v Speaker 2>I mean, where does that stand now? Like it is

393
00:22:05.079 --> 00:22:07.279
<v Speaker 2>still a shaken baby case?

394
00:22:07.440 --> 00:22:07.640
<v Speaker 1>Right?

395
00:22:08.480 --> 00:22:12.519
<v Speaker 4>That is also now in question, and that will be

396
00:22:12.599 --> 00:22:15.680
<v Speaker 4>part of what the trial court has to decide of

397
00:22:15.920 --> 00:22:20.680
<v Speaker 4>how central was her shaken baby diagnosis to Roberson's conviction.

398
00:22:21.839 --> 00:22:23.720
<v Speaker 4>I think we saw in some of the dissenting opinions

399
00:22:23.759 --> 00:22:27.519
<v Speaker 4>from the CCA, I think maybe two judges said that

400
00:22:27.920 --> 00:22:29.720
<v Speaker 4>they did not think this was a shaking baby case,

401
00:22:29.759 --> 00:22:32.799
<v Speaker 4>like you sail or that you know, there was a

402
00:22:32.839 --> 00:22:36.319
<v Speaker 4>blunt force trauma and clear signs that he had brought

403
00:22:36.319 --> 00:22:41.920
<v Speaker 4>about her death not solely through shaking. I think you

404
00:22:41.920 --> 00:22:45.400
<v Speaker 4>will hear his lawyers say that that is a absurd

405
00:22:45.599 --> 00:22:50.160
<v Speaker 4>case to make, and their references to shaking and shaking

406
00:22:50.200 --> 00:22:53.480
<v Speaker 4>baby syndrome dozens and dozens and dozens times throughout the

407
00:22:53.519 --> 00:22:55.759
<v Speaker 4>trial record. Like you said, a juror came out and

408
00:22:55.799 --> 00:22:58.759
<v Speaker 4>said that this was solely what they convicted him based on,

409
00:22:59.440 --> 00:23:02.400
<v Speaker 4>and that she would change her decision today if she

410
00:23:02.440 --> 00:23:05.039
<v Speaker 4>had been presented with all these other facts. But that

411
00:23:05.119 --> 00:23:07.759
<v Speaker 4>will be something that you know, the court will have

412
00:23:07.799 --> 00:23:08.279
<v Speaker 4>to decide.

413
00:23:08.440 --> 00:23:10.119
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I mean, this is a situation where even the

414
00:23:10.200 --> 00:23:13.119
<v Speaker 1>jurors are split, right, because after the decision from the

415
00:23:13.200 --> 00:23:16.000
<v Speaker 1>Court of Criminal Appeals this week, the foreman of the

416
00:23:16.079 --> 00:23:18.759
<v Speaker 1>jury came out and told a local television station. He

417
00:23:18.839 --> 00:23:23.440
<v Speaker 1>said that the jury did not convict Riverson based on

418
00:23:23.480 --> 00:23:27.839
<v Speaker 1>sha shaken baby, shaken baby syndrome, that there was evident

419
00:23:27.880 --> 00:23:30.599
<v Speaker 1>of blunt force trauma. He kind of quoted the nurses

420
00:23:30.680 --> 00:23:35.119
<v Speaker 1>testifying at trial saying that you know, she was the

421
00:23:35.119 --> 00:23:37.759
<v Speaker 1>bluest child one nurse I had ever seen. Her face

422
00:23:37.880 --> 00:23:40.039
<v Speaker 1>was battered and bloodied. We already kind of talked about

423
00:23:40.039 --> 00:23:42.559
<v Speaker 1>some of that background there, but then of course you

424
00:23:42.599 --> 00:23:45.920
<v Speaker 1>then quote Terry Compton. Everything that was presented to us

425
00:23:46.599 --> 00:23:49.799
<v Speaker 1>was all about shaking baby syndrome. That was what our

426
00:23:49.839 --> 00:23:52.519
<v Speaker 1>decision was based on. Nothing else was ever mentioned or

427
00:23:52.559 --> 00:23:57.039
<v Speaker 1>presented to us to consider, So there's split there. Obviously,

428
00:23:57.039 --> 00:24:00.279
<v Speaker 1>you need a unanimous jury in order to convict someone

429
00:24:00.319 --> 00:24:03.599
<v Speaker 1>to death, So, you know, could you possibly make the

430
00:24:03.720 --> 00:24:06.319
<v Speaker 1>argument that at least wonder saying that in that changes thing,

431
00:24:06.319 --> 00:24:08.440
<v Speaker 1>which which sort of leads me to my next question

432
00:24:08.640 --> 00:24:12.519
<v Speaker 1>of what exactly are we supposed to be evaluating here?

433
00:24:12.640 --> 00:24:16.000
<v Speaker 1>I mean, are we supposed to just you know, the courts.

434
00:24:16.200 --> 00:24:17.960
<v Speaker 1>When I say we, I really mean the courts here?

435
00:24:18.119 --> 00:24:21.000
<v Speaker 1>Are the courts supposed to be deciding he's guilty or

436
00:24:21.039 --> 00:24:23.880
<v Speaker 1>he's not guilty. Are they supposed to be evaluating is

437
00:24:23.920 --> 00:24:26.960
<v Speaker 1>he guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Or are they supposed

438
00:24:26.960 --> 00:24:30.599
<v Speaker 1>to be evaluating, you know, despite whether they think he's

439
00:24:30.640 --> 00:24:34.000
<v Speaker 1>guilty or not guilty, that he deserves a new trial,

440
00:24:34.559 --> 00:24:36.079
<v Speaker 1>or can they decide any of those things?

441
00:24:37.559 --> 00:24:40.160
<v Speaker 4>Right now? I think the rieman is far more limited.

442
00:24:40.200 --> 00:24:43.680
<v Speaker 4>It's if under in light of the Andrew Urke decision

443
00:24:43.720 --> 00:24:46.559
<v Speaker 4>out of Dallas County, that you know, there is sufficient

444
00:24:47.359 --> 00:24:51.920
<v Speaker 4>doubt about how Robertson's trial went down to you know,

445
00:24:52.039 --> 00:24:54.319
<v Speaker 4>recommends that he gets a new trial, and then ultimately

446
00:24:54.319 --> 00:24:56.039
<v Speaker 4>the CCA will have to decide whether or not that

447
00:24:56.079 --> 00:25:00.720
<v Speaker 4>should happen. His lawyers are arguing for his ac actual innocence,

448
00:25:00.759 --> 00:25:02.960
<v Speaker 4>or have been arguing for his actual innocence, which is

449
00:25:02.960 --> 00:25:06.160
<v Speaker 4>a much higher bar to clear for the defense than

450
00:25:07.400 --> 00:25:11.680
<v Speaker 4>just that he's not guilty. So they are suggesting that

451
00:25:11.720 --> 00:25:14.240
<v Speaker 4>they have evidence and that they know that he is

452
00:25:14.440 --> 00:25:18.079
<v Speaker 4>actually innocent and can prove that in court. I think

453
00:25:18.079 --> 00:25:22.440
<v Speaker 4>maybe some of his lawmaker supporters are taking a kind

454
00:25:22.480 --> 00:25:26.599
<v Speaker 4>of a more conservative approach and saying that there is

455
00:25:26.680 --> 00:25:29.480
<v Speaker 4>just enough doubt about the fairness of his trial and

456
00:25:29.680 --> 00:25:33.440
<v Speaker 4>that he was afforded the proper due process, and we

457
00:25:33.559 --> 00:25:37.160
<v Speaker 4>just shouldn't be executing somebody if there is that doubt

458
00:25:37.319 --> 00:25:40.519
<v Speaker 4>whether or not we think he is actually innocent. So

459
00:25:40.599 --> 00:25:44.319
<v Speaker 4>there is a real range of routes that his supporters

460
00:25:44.440 --> 00:25:45.519
<v Speaker 4>are pursuing, and.

461
00:25:45.519 --> 00:25:48.599
<v Speaker 3>I mean, I think that is what so many death

462
00:25:48.640 --> 00:25:50.720
<v Speaker 3>penalty cases come down to, and like they're not usually

463
00:25:50.799 --> 00:25:53.559
<v Speaker 3>done in this like this level of scrutiny, even when

464
00:25:53.559 --> 00:25:57.759
<v Speaker 3>we have had like high profile cases like Melissa Lucy

465
00:25:57.759 --> 00:26:00.680
<v Speaker 3>on these other cases that are very high profile, very rarely,

466
00:26:00.720 --> 00:26:03.960
<v Speaker 3>I think is the evidence played out so publicly and like,

467
00:26:04.359 --> 00:26:07.680
<v Speaker 3>but often it does come down to more than just

468
00:26:07.720 --> 00:26:09.680
<v Speaker 3>like did they do it or not right?

469
00:26:10.000 --> 00:26:12.160
<v Speaker 2>So many of these, like innocence cases, are.

470
00:26:13.880 --> 00:26:16.359
<v Speaker 3>Did we like follow all of the proceed like it

471
00:26:16.400 --> 00:26:18.920
<v Speaker 3>was all of this handled correctly? Because the bar is

472
00:26:18.920 --> 00:26:21.240
<v Speaker 3>so I mean, you're putting someone to death, Like I

473
00:26:21.279 --> 00:26:24.480
<v Speaker 3>think the bar for many criminal cases is like, did we,

474
00:26:24.839 --> 00:26:26.920
<v Speaker 3>you know, give this person due process? But when the

475
00:26:26.920 --> 00:26:29.160
<v Speaker 3>bar for this is so high, like I think they

476
00:26:29.160 --> 00:26:31.640
<v Speaker 3>often succeed on these, not on the merits, but on

477
00:26:31.720 --> 00:26:35.799
<v Speaker 3>the you know, this person was not given due process totally.

478
00:26:36.839 --> 00:26:40.039
<v Speaker 1>It's interesting to just hear this conversation about shaking baby syndrome.

479
00:26:40.079 --> 00:26:42.599
<v Speaker 1>We actually talked on last week's podcast about how I

480
00:26:42.680 --> 00:26:48.200
<v Speaker 1>used to cover criminal trials and I covered a shaken

481
00:26:48.279 --> 00:26:51.000
<v Speaker 1>baby case in two thousand and nine. I went back

482
00:26:51.079 --> 00:26:53.000
<v Speaker 1>just before the show and googled try to figure out

483
00:26:53.000 --> 00:26:59.119
<v Speaker 1>when it was, and in that case, there was I

484
00:26:59.119 --> 00:27:05.960
<v Speaker 1>think the the medical consensus on shake and baby syndrome

485
00:27:06.000 --> 00:27:09.000
<v Speaker 1>had not reached maybe what it is now, but there

486
00:27:09.039 --> 00:27:13.640
<v Speaker 1>were people who were casting doubt on it. And I

487
00:27:13.759 --> 00:27:16.640
<v Speaker 1>have this memory of sitting there in that trial and thinking,

488
00:27:16.960 --> 00:27:22.160
<v Speaker 1>you know, you sort of maybe some people at least

489
00:27:22.200 --> 00:27:25.480
<v Speaker 1>I'll speak for myself, sit in these trials and they think,

490
00:27:26.279 --> 00:27:29.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, the prosecution has no reason to push a

491
00:27:29.440 --> 00:27:32.119
<v Speaker 1>certain narrative, but the defense is going to find, you know,

492
00:27:32.240 --> 00:27:35.039
<v Speaker 1>has clear motivation to try to make a case about

493
00:27:35.119 --> 00:27:37.079
<v Speaker 1>you know, this isn't real. And so they brought in

494
00:27:37.119 --> 00:27:42.000
<v Speaker 1>a witness who you know, was talking about how the

495
00:27:42.599 --> 00:27:46.279
<v Speaker 1>science behind shaken baby syndrome was not quite where it

496
00:27:46.359 --> 00:27:49.680
<v Speaker 1>is now. But it's hard to not look at that

497
00:27:49.720 --> 00:27:52.799
<v Speaker 1>skeptically when you're thinking, Okay, they're going to do anything

498
00:27:52.799 --> 00:27:54.839
<v Speaker 1>to try to save their client from this case. It's

499
00:27:54.880 --> 00:27:57.720
<v Speaker 1>interesting the person actually was found not guilty in that case,

500
00:27:57.880 --> 00:27:59.759
<v Speaker 1>but it does like make me think about the junk

501
00:27:59.839 --> 00:28:03.279
<v Speaker 1>law which was passed four years later, and how that

502
00:28:03.559 --> 00:28:08.119
<v Speaker 1>might cause you to want to reconsider some of those cases.

503
00:28:09.880 --> 00:28:12.759
<v Speaker 1>You know, if you can demonstrate the change medical consensus,

504
00:28:12.799 --> 00:28:18.200
<v Speaker 1>it might really mean something in the eyes of a jury,

505
00:28:18.759 --> 00:28:19.079
<v Speaker 1>which is.

506
00:28:19.079 --> 00:28:21.119
<v Speaker 3>I think why this whole thing is so interesting because

507
00:28:21.160 --> 00:28:24.720
<v Speaker 3>I think there are people who are just very very

508
00:28:24.759 --> 00:28:28.200
<v Speaker 3>opposed to, you know, the death penalty in general, and

509
00:28:28.240 --> 00:28:32.880
<v Speaker 3>like are like work specifically on death penalty cases, and

510
00:28:32.920 --> 00:28:34.519
<v Speaker 3>we might think of them as sort of being one

511
00:28:34.920 --> 00:28:38.680
<v Speaker 3>like political leaning. It's interesting about this case is it's

512
00:28:38.720 --> 00:28:40.920
<v Speaker 3>like it's sort of, like you said, cross cutting across

513
00:28:40.920 --> 00:28:46.640
<v Speaker 3>political leanings, and it's not Ben is clearcut of like

514
00:28:46.680 --> 00:28:48.359
<v Speaker 3>just the defense versus the prosecute, you know what I mean,

515
00:28:48.400 --> 00:28:51.920
<v Speaker 3>Like it's gotten very very I mean, I think a

516
00:28:51.920 --> 00:28:54.039
<v Speaker 3>lot of lawmakers who are very supportive of the death

517
00:28:54.079 --> 00:28:57.799
<v Speaker 3>penalty generally are very opposed in this case.

518
00:28:58.079 --> 00:29:04.559
<v Speaker 1>Yes, well, I mean Brian Harrison, you know, among if

519
00:29:04.599 --> 00:29:08.200
<v Speaker 1>not the most conservative member of the Texas House, teaming

520
00:29:08.279 --> 00:29:12.119
<v Speaker 1>up with Joe Moody, a Democrat, teaming up with Jeff Leech,

521
00:29:12.200 --> 00:29:15.200
<v Speaker 1>a Republican, but who does not get along very well

522
00:29:15.240 --> 00:29:17.440
<v Speaker 1>with Brian Harrison at all. I mean, if you follow

523
00:29:17.480 --> 00:29:22.599
<v Speaker 1>them on Twitter, they post shots at each other at times.

524
00:29:22.720 --> 00:29:24.960
<v Speaker 1>And then on the other side you have you know,

525
00:29:25.039 --> 00:29:28.920
<v Speaker 1>Ken Paxton and Mitch Little, also very conservative folks. But

526
00:29:30.079 --> 00:29:32.839
<v Speaker 1>you know, there was a press conference right where a

527
00:29:32.880 --> 00:29:37.200
<v Speaker 1>big Republican donor, Doug Deeson, came out in supportive Roberson,

528
00:29:37.200 --> 00:29:41.240
<v Speaker 1>and so those kind of mixed alliances have been really

529
00:29:41.240 --> 00:29:44.119
<v Speaker 1>interesting to watch. I mean, I also I'm curious, as

530
00:29:44.200 --> 00:29:50.160
<v Speaker 1>the law and politics reporter Eleanor, you know, I mean,

531
00:29:50.200 --> 00:29:53.000
<v Speaker 1>what do you think about just the way this case

532
00:29:53.079 --> 00:29:57.200
<v Speaker 1>has been politicized, and I mean there seemed to be

533
00:29:58.279 --> 00:30:01.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, we had a story about this last a

534
00:30:01.039 --> 00:30:04.279
<v Speaker 1>lot of concerns around just how so many more court

535
00:30:04.319 --> 00:30:06.720
<v Speaker 1>cases are being played out in the court of public

536
00:30:06.759 --> 00:30:10.119
<v Speaker 1>opinion as opposed to the weighan of evidence and everything

537
00:30:10.119 --> 00:30:10.880
<v Speaker 1>that goes on there.

538
00:30:11.160 --> 00:30:11.359
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

539
00:30:11.400 --> 00:30:14.799
<v Speaker 3>Absolutely, it's been so interesting. I remember like the after

540
00:30:14.839 --> 00:30:18.240
<v Speaker 3>that subpoena when we all were like, like the editors

541
00:30:18.680 --> 00:30:20.200
<v Speaker 3>and the readers were like, what does that mean? And

542
00:30:20.240 --> 00:30:22.359
<v Speaker 3>we're like, oh, I don't know. I don't think anyone knows.

543
00:30:22.359 --> 00:30:24.000
<v Speaker 3>And we were like calling judges who were like, yeah,

544
00:30:24.039 --> 00:30:27.160
<v Speaker 3>we don't know either. So it's really, I mean, unprecedented

545
00:30:27.160 --> 00:30:30.319
<v Speaker 3>in so many ways. But I do think the pressure

546
00:30:30.400 --> 00:30:33.519
<v Speaker 3>on the courts around this, I think in some ways

547
00:30:33.599 --> 00:30:34.640
<v Speaker 3>is unprecedented.

548
00:30:34.640 --> 00:30:35.880
<v Speaker 2>But I also think in a.

549
00:30:35.920 --> 00:30:38.720
<v Speaker 3>Lot of ways, like I think they feel this degree

550
00:30:38.759 --> 00:30:41.000
<v Speaker 3>of pressure on a lot of death penalty cases. This

551
00:30:41.160 --> 00:30:44.359
<v Speaker 3>is obviously getting even more attention, but like there have

552
00:30:44.400 --> 00:30:47.359
<v Speaker 3>been very very high profile and you know, I think

553
00:30:47.359 --> 00:30:49.039
<v Speaker 3>they probably would say, like they take all the death

554
00:30:49.039 --> 00:30:52.640
<v Speaker 3>penalty cases very seriously, but we're seeing just a lot

555
00:30:52.640 --> 00:30:55.359
<v Speaker 3>of I mean, the Court of Criminal Appeals itself is

556
00:30:55.839 --> 00:31:00.720
<v Speaker 3>you know, after the last election, became much more aligned

557
00:31:00.759 --> 00:31:04.599
<v Speaker 3>with Attorney General Ken Paxton, who helped unseat three incumbents, and.

558
00:31:05.039 --> 00:31:07.440
<v Speaker 1>Because he disagreed with the ring that they issued.

559
00:31:07.559 --> 00:31:10.400
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, he disagreed with their ruling on a you know,

560
00:31:10.960 --> 00:31:15.039
<v Speaker 3>on a voting rights case and he or election fraud case,

561
00:31:15.079 --> 00:31:18.279
<v Speaker 3>and he, you know, has been very overt about like

562
00:31:18.400 --> 00:31:20.200
<v Speaker 3>being willing to do that again and going to continue

563
00:31:20.200 --> 00:31:22.200
<v Speaker 3>to do that. Two current incumbents are not going to

564
00:31:22.279 --> 00:31:24.880
<v Speaker 3>run for reelection again. You know, we saw with the

565
00:31:24.880 --> 00:31:29.720
<v Speaker 3>Texas Supreme Court recently with when the quorum break happened,

566
00:31:29.920 --> 00:31:34.880
<v Speaker 3>and Paxton and Abbott both went to the text Supreme

567
00:31:34.920 --> 00:31:37.160
<v Speaker 3>Court saying like remove these people from their seats, and

568
00:31:38.279 --> 00:31:42.400
<v Speaker 3>Michael Quinn Sullivan, you know, sort of a conservative commentator saying,

569
00:31:42.400 --> 00:31:46.000
<v Speaker 3>you know, to the Texasupreme Court on Twitter, like Republican

570
00:31:46.039 --> 00:31:48.400
<v Speaker 3>primary voters are watching what you do on this.

571
00:31:48.519 --> 00:31:50.960
<v Speaker 2>So a lot of very overt politicization of the courts.

572
00:31:51.079 --> 00:31:53.000
<v Speaker 3>I will say, like, at least from so far from

573
00:31:53.000 --> 00:31:55.880
<v Speaker 3>an outsider's perspective, you know, there's not a ton of

574
00:31:55.880 --> 00:31:57.920
<v Speaker 3>evidence that the courts are bowing to that right. I mean,

575
00:31:57.960 --> 00:32:00.799
<v Speaker 3>the tex Supreme Court did not expel those House members

576
00:32:00.880 --> 00:32:02.359
<v Speaker 3>yet at least we like don't.

577
00:32:02.160 --> 00:32:06.000
<v Speaker 2>Have a ruling the Court Criminal Appeals. Did you know.

578
00:32:08.000 --> 00:32:09.559
<v Speaker 3>We've seen this in other rulings, but also in this

579
00:32:09.640 --> 00:32:13.119
<v Speaker 3>ruling sort of, you know, it seems like remain somewhat

580
00:32:13.160 --> 00:32:16.759
<v Speaker 3>consistent with their previous rulings on this, sou But I

581
00:32:16.799 --> 00:32:18.200
<v Speaker 3>have to imagine they're feeling that pressure.

582
00:32:18.359 --> 00:32:20.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I mean, and I would No one has said

583
00:32:20.880 --> 00:32:23.400
<v Speaker 1>this to me, but as I watched the defense on

584
00:32:23.440 --> 00:32:26.240
<v Speaker 1>this and having press conferences with a big Republican donor,

585
00:32:26.319 --> 00:32:29.440
<v Speaker 1>or having people like Brian Harrison and Jeff Leach come

586
00:32:29.440 --> 00:32:32.200
<v Speaker 1>out in favor of them, you know, I've got to

587
00:32:32.240 --> 00:32:35.000
<v Speaker 1>think that one of the reasons they're using those voices

588
00:32:35.160 --> 00:32:37.039
<v Speaker 1>is to try to send a signal to the Court

589
00:32:37.039 --> 00:32:40.599
<v Speaker 1>of Criminal Appeals that says, you know, you will get

590
00:32:40.680 --> 00:32:44.440
<v Speaker 1>some support from your right word flank if you, you know,

591
00:32:44.519 --> 00:32:46.759
<v Speaker 1>make what we feel is the right decision here, you

592
00:32:46.759 --> 00:32:47.160
<v Speaker 1>know what I mean?

593
00:32:47.240 --> 00:32:50.000
<v Speaker 3>Doug Deson said exactly, Yeah, yeah.

594
00:32:49.680 --> 00:32:51.880
<v Speaker 1>And I mean, you know, the thing about being a

595
00:32:52.000 --> 00:32:54.960
<v Speaker 1>judge on the Court of Criminal Appeals is nobody knows

596
00:32:54.960 --> 00:32:58.039
<v Speaker 1>who the hell you are. Right. I don't mean that

597
00:32:58.079 --> 00:33:01.839
<v Speaker 1>in a derogatory manner, I see, that's more derogatory about

598
00:33:01.839 --> 00:33:03.599
<v Speaker 1>the voters than it is about the judges. But just

599
00:33:03.640 --> 00:33:06.839
<v Speaker 1>like people don't know the names of the nine statewide

600
00:33:06.880 --> 00:33:09.359
<v Speaker 1>elected Quarter of Criminal Appeals, you also have to elect

601
00:33:09.480 --> 00:33:11.720
<v Speaker 1>nine Supreme Court members, and you have to elect your

602
00:33:11.799 --> 00:33:14.400
<v Speaker 1>local judges, and you have to elect your Court of

603
00:33:14.440 --> 00:33:17.079
<v Speaker 1>Appeals judges and your state representative and all these different

604
00:33:17.119 --> 00:33:19.319
<v Speaker 1>other things. Like it's just really hard to keep track

605
00:33:19.359 --> 00:33:22.359
<v Speaker 1>of that kind of thing. So the risk there is

606
00:33:22.559 --> 00:33:26.240
<v Speaker 1>one little case that people can glom onto could bring

607
00:33:26.319 --> 00:33:29.079
<v Speaker 1>you down, and you have to think about that. It's

608
00:33:29.200 --> 00:33:32.000
<v Speaker 1>I think it's probably impossible not to have that way

609
00:33:32.079 --> 00:33:34.000
<v Speaker 1>on the back of your head, even if you're going

610
00:33:34.079 --> 00:33:35.799
<v Speaker 1>to do the right thing and try to block it

611
00:33:35.839 --> 00:33:39.640
<v Speaker 1>out and make that you know, go away and make

612
00:33:39.640 --> 00:33:43.519
<v Speaker 1>the decision based on the law and the facts. But

613
00:33:45.440 --> 00:33:48.240
<v Speaker 1>maybe what they're trying to say here is exactly right,

614
00:33:48.359 --> 00:33:51.880
<v Speaker 1>Like it's not just this is not a case where

615
00:33:51.960 --> 00:33:56.319
<v Speaker 1>the hardline Republican primary voters is unanimous in thinking this

616
00:33:56.359 --> 00:33:58.039
<v Speaker 1>guy needs to be executed right now.

617
00:33:58.720 --> 00:34:02.880
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I think can Pack has really posed the only

618
00:34:02.920 --> 00:34:06.680
<v Speaker 3>like meaningful threat to these like these judges who are

619
00:34:06.720 --> 00:34:08.719
<v Speaker 3>elected largely Like if you're in a coumbany, you can

620
00:34:08.760 --> 00:34:09.760
<v Speaker 3>get reelected.

621
00:34:09.320 --> 00:34:10.480
<v Speaker 1>Based on your name basically.

622
00:34:10.599 --> 00:34:10.760
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

623
00:34:10.800 --> 00:34:11.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

624
00:34:11.039 --> 00:34:15.079
<v Speaker 3>There was I mean a huge scandal probably twenty years

625
00:34:15.079 --> 00:34:18.159
<v Speaker 3>ago with a court criminal Appeals judge who was really

626
00:34:18.159 --> 00:34:20.559
<v Speaker 3>in the spotlight after she refused to let a lawyer

627
00:34:21.639 --> 00:34:25.440
<v Speaker 3>file an appeal like they were like twenty minutes late

628
00:34:25.480 --> 00:34:27.199
<v Speaker 3>and she locked the door, and it was this huge

629
00:34:27.280 --> 00:34:29.920
<v Speaker 3>national news story and she was like condemned from the

630
00:34:30.000 --> 00:34:31.039
<v Speaker 3>you know, fight everyone.

631
00:34:31.400 --> 00:34:33.039
<v Speaker 1>And this was on a death row case.

632
00:34:32.880 --> 00:34:34.719
<v Speaker 3>On a death row case, and he ended up being

633
00:34:35.039 --> 00:34:37.880
<v Speaker 3>executed despite because the lawyer was a few minutes late

634
00:34:37.920 --> 00:34:40.000
<v Speaker 3>to file the filing and she locked the door and

635
00:34:40.000 --> 00:34:41.000
<v Speaker 3>wouldn't let him file it.

636
00:34:41.320 --> 00:34:43.039
<v Speaker 2>I mean, it was national news.

637
00:34:43.519 --> 00:34:48.159
<v Speaker 3>And still she served another twenty years on the court,

638
00:34:48.199 --> 00:34:51.239
<v Speaker 3>re elected every year until she ran into the brick

639
00:34:51.280 --> 00:34:54.079
<v Speaker 3>wall that is Ken Paxton and was unseated last term. So,

640
00:34:54.760 --> 00:34:56.360
<v Speaker 3>you know, I think for a long time they haven't

641
00:34:56.360 --> 00:34:58.480
<v Speaker 3>really had to contend with this level of political pressure.

642
00:34:58.840 --> 00:35:00.880
<v Speaker 3>It is probably easier for them to hear from a

643
00:35:00.920 --> 00:35:03.719
<v Speaker 3>major Republican donor. You know, if they try to do

644
00:35:03.760 --> 00:35:06.079
<v Speaker 3>that to you on this, we're here to back you.

645
00:35:06.320 --> 00:35:11.639
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Yeah, So Kayla, where do we go from here?

646
00:35:13.000 --> 00:35:18.119
<v Speaker 4>Well, it's sort of unclear. The Court of Criminal Appeals

647
00:35:18.119 --> 00:35:21.119
<v Speaker 4>and its order didn't lay out a timeline for the

648
00:35:21.159 --> 00:35:24.000
<v Speaker 4>Anderson County Court to act. This could very well be

649
00:35:24.079 --> 00:35:27.960
<v Speaker 4>another year's long process. When the CCA stayed his execution

650
00:35:28.119 --> 00:35:30.320
<v Speaker 4>in twenty sixteen, basically did a very similar thing that

651
00:35:30.360 --> 00:35:33.440
<v Speaker 4>they did on Thursday. They stayed in twenty sixteen. I

652
00:35:33.440 --> 00:35:35.320
<v Speaker 4>think COVID had something to do with it, But there

653
00:35:35.400 --> 00:35:41.320
<v Speaker 4>wasn't an evidentiary hearing until twenty twenty one to twenty

654
00:35:41.360 --> 00:35:45.639
<v Speaker 4>twenty one ish, four or five years later, and his

655
00:35:45.760 --> 00:35:50.559
<v Speaker 4>execution wasn't set again until eight years after that initial stay,

656
00:35:50.880 --> 00:35:53.360
<v Speaker 4>So it could be a really long process or not.

657
00:35:53.440 --> 00:35:55.840
<v Speaker 4>I don't know. Maybe how public it has become will

658
00:35:56.000 --> 00:35:59.440
<v Speaker 4>change the timeline. Another outstanding question is whether the Attorney

659
00:35:59.440 --> 00:36:02.079
<v Speaker 4>General is off is going to continue representing the state

660
00:36:02.199 --> 00:36:07.079
<v Speaker 4>in this part of the case. Again, obviously, con Packsin's

661
00:36:07.079 --> 00:36:09.320
<v Speaker 4>been very vocal about what he thinks and his office

662
00:36:09.360 --> 00:36:12.639
<v Speaker 4>is now, you know, representing the state, So it's hard

663
00:36:12.679 --> 00:36:14.679
<v Speaker 4>to imagine that if they continue doing that that they

664
00:36:14.719 --> 00:36:18.719
<v Speaker 4>will concede any of these points. So that is kind

665
00:36:18.719 --> 00:36:21.360
<v Speaker 4>of all still up in the air. And I think

666
00:36:21.440 --> 00:36:24.039
<v Speaker 4>all of the claims that Roberson's attorneys have been making

667
00:36:24.039 --> 00:36:26.280
<v Speaker 4>on his behalf, even though some of them were dismissed

668
00:36:26.280 --> 00:36:29.880
<v Speaker 4>by the CCA this latest round. I think what's included

669
00:36:29.920 --> 00:36:32.440
<v Speaker 4>in them, the facts of those or the claims made

670
00:36:32.480 --> 00:36:34.519
<v Speaker 4>in them, are still going to be relevant as they

671
00:36:34.639 --> 00:36:36.719
<v Speaker 4>make his case this time around in Anderson County.

672
00:36:36.920 --> 00:36:38.800
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. I mean it does seem like maybe we're falling

673
00:36:38.880 --> 00:36:41.199
<v Speaker 1>into a pattern here though, where the Court of Criminal

674
00:36:41.199 --> 00:36:45.039
<v Speaker 1>Appeals sends it back and the court on the ground,

675
00:36:45.079 --> 00:36:48.559
<v Speaker 1>the district court does not seem very interested in changing,

676
00:36:49.079 --> 00:36:50.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, the result of this, and then it comes

677
00:36:50.840 --> 00:36:53.400
<v Speaker 1>back to this. You know what's going to break that cycle?

678
00:36:53.480 --> 00:36:53.840
<v Speaker 1>Either way?

679
00:36:53.920 --> 00:36:56.440
<v Speaker 3>I think we'll have to see, well, potentially some new

680
00:36:56.440 --> 00:36:57.719
<v Speaker 3>faces on the Court of Criminal Appeals.

681
00:36:57.760 --> 00:37:00.679
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, if I got two people stepping down, Yeah.

682
00:37:00.159 --> 00:37:03.559
<v Speaker 1>That could be Okay. Well, that is all we have

683
00:37:03.760 --> 00:37:06.599
<v Speaker 1>for today. Thank you to our producers, Rob and Chris,

684
00:37:06.639 --> 00:37:08.519
<v Speaker 1>and thank you Kyla. We will talk to you all

685
00:37:08.519 --> 00:37:08.920
<v Speaker 1>next week.
