We released a podcast episode on the Texas governor pardoning a man convicted of killing another man during a protest. Then another story came up (as they do) because of the algorithm.
Marcellus Williams in Missouri was asking for a stay on his execution and an evaluation as to his innocence. This case was riddled with mishandling and information to spin up the masses. Mr. Williams was charged with murder. The Innocence Project titled their story of Mr. Williams as evidence of innocence, prosecutor’s confessions, racial bias at trial, and victim opposition. Something we’ve learned in our practice is to undersell and overdeliver.
On August 11, 1998, Mrs. Gaye was found stabbed to death in her home. Fingerprints, footprints, hair, and trace evidence on the knife were found. None of that forensic evidence could be matched to Mr. Williams. The part that is not as strong as they would like is the claim that the witnesses that testified against Mr. Williams should not have been trusted. Mr. Cole stated that Mr. Williams confessed to him during their time in jail together. A Mrs. Asaro, Mr. Williams ex-girlfriend, stated that Mr. Williams was guilty. The issue the defense had with these two is that they testified for lighter sentences of their own and possibly reward money. I was unable to find what they actually received for testifying. However, a third independent witness purchased the victim’s laptop from Mr. Williams. Mr. Williams states that Mrs. Asaro gave him the laptop but he must not have testified so the jury never heard that story. Also, the defense has an issue that no new information was given by the two witnesses and seems to claim that the police or DA’s gave them the information to use to testify. However, the defense doesn’t seem to have proof of that or else they would be bigger news stories breaking on this. But when we look at the evidence the key would be Mrs. Asaro either Mr. Williams is guilty and she told the truth or she knows who the killer is and sold-out Mr. Williams. Either way this doesn’t prove his innocence, it may have just muddied the waters, but no more than they were during the trial. Any good defense attorney would ask about the leniency and the payments each received.
In 2016 DNA was tested on the murder weapon and was found to be male. That DNA did not match Mr. Williams. A board was put in place to review the evidence and worked until 2023 when the new governor dissolved the board without a final report. Once the board was dissolved the new attorney general (AG) set a new execution date. Later a DNA report showed that the DNA on the murder weapon belonged to an assistant district attorney (ADA) and the investigator that handled the murder weapon as far back as 2001 prior to the original trial. Again this doesn’t necessarily prove that Mr. Williams is innocent. It either proves that the ADA and investigator did this on purpose to ensure confusion or that Mr. Williams didn’t leave DNA behind or that the ADA and investigator are incompetent.
Now the one that should have granted Mr. Williams at least a new trial is Batson violations that occurred during the original cases voir dire. Under the 14th Amendment we are all guaranteed equal protections. When in jury selection an attorney cannot strike a juror from serving on the jury due to a protected reason. In this case, the original prosecutor seemed to have struck a juror because like Mr. Williams, he was Black. When pressed further he said they looked like brothers and not because he was Black since that would be a violation.
To staying an ExecutionThe parts of the story that don’t matter as much unfortunately is that Mr. Williams had found religion and became a poet. The law only focuses on a moment in time. We do not get credit for being great before or after we are found guilty. Also, the wishes of the victim’s family are not weighted as heavily as that of the AG and the governor. The victim’s surviving husband was opposed to the death penalty and was satisfied with life without parole. Cases belong to the states and not the victims and this seemed to be a battle between the new DA and the governor and AG. Ultimately, Mr. Williams’ execution was not stopped and he was put to death after twenty three years in prison.
The algorithm strikes again and closer to home. I stumbled across the story of Robert Roberson, a Texas man that was charged with the murder of his child, based on shaken baby syndrome. He is scheduled to be executed on October the 17th 2024. In 2002, Mr. Roberson showed up at the ER with his two-year-old daughter, she was turning blue and is unconscious. He told the hospital staff, “ I think she fell out of her bed.” The doctor concluded that the daughter was violently shaken. The detective assigned to the case interviewed dad and has an odd reaction to him. Mr. Roberson seemed to not express emotions, not mad, sad nor anything he is matter of fact. Obviously, the detective thought it’s because he is a stone-cold killer. The defense claimed it’s because Mr. Roberson is autistic. After years in retirement the detective thinks he may have gotten it wrong by believing an expert simply because they are experts. During the trial a doctor stated, “Look at the swelling and hemorrhaging in the brain.” Another expert stated that “...the damage was more than one fall, it was multiple head injuries.”
Roberson didn’t argue with the experts, he stated that he had grabbed her when he was trying to wake her. Others testified that in the past they had seen him threaten, shake, and spank the two-year-old, but none witnessed the events that sent her to the hospital. Something that should have cut both ways, but only seemed to harm Mr. Roberson was a claim that an ER nurse believed that the two-year-old had been sexually assaulted. Later testing revealed that she was wrong. This should highlight that people, whether they are experts or not, can be wrong. They jump to conclusions and suffer from confirmation bias. However, Roberson’s defense believes that it was a key factor in the death penalty decision. In 2016, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stayed Mr. Roberson’s execution because different experts rejected shaken baby and stated she was chronically ill, and was diagnosed with a condition that would cause her collapse and turn blue. A doctor had given her codeine which is known to cause breathing difficulties in children. The biggest issue for Mr. Roberson is that shaken baby syndrome exists and it can happen, but other issues mirror the same symptoms and outcomes. Falling, head wounds, lack of oxygen, and other symptoms can look similar to shaken baby syndrome.
The problem with both of these cases is that they are looked back at as if the trial court made the right decisions. Unless there is new evidence that proves that a person is truly innocent or that something unconstitutional or even illegal occurred during the jury trial the original verdict is given great weight. That is why it is very important to have the right legal team from the start. A good trial lawyer not only tries to win the jury trial they are also ensuring that they preserve every issue at trial that could be deemed worthy of an appeal if they happen to lose the case. It is like focusing on the present and the possible future at the same time.
Comentarios