The Texas Supreme Court has passed a judgment against lawmakers who used their subpoena power to halt the execution of a death row inmate for his daughter’s “shaken baby” death, paving the way for it to proceed.
Robert Roberson, 58, was scheduled for questioning by the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee, which has given a directive through the legislative subpoena a month ago stating that he needed to give testimony about the case which led to all the litigations that have stopped his October 17th execution with just ours left before the process.
The high court justices have disclosed that with the rulings, the house committee have the liberty to go on an interview with Roberson, they explained that it was important that the subpoena issues did not stop the execution that has been scheduled by the authorities, that further explained that the nothing in the holding of the judiciary prevents the committee from ordinarily pursuing judicial relief to compel witness testimony.
It was disclosed that the decision of the House committee to make use of a subpoena to mandate Roberson to testify in person before them has been used as a legal gambit. Some of the lawmakers have indicated that the move was used to buy more time for the accused, whose cause has bipartisan support.
A Democrat and Chairman of the Committee Joe Moody, and a committee member Jeff Leach, a Republican, stated that they had expected the subpoena to ultimately stop the execution of Roberson which has been decided for good, they further stated that the judgement which has been passed by Supreme court does not in any way stop them from gathering the testimonies of the accused before the education is carried out.
In a joint signed statement by Moody and Leach that stated that the Supreme Court strongly reinforced their belief that their Committee can indeed obtain Mr Roberson’s testimony and made clear that it expects the Executive Branch of government to accommodate them in doing so.
The lawmaker’s decision to issue a subpoena to allow Roberson to testify in the case has been related to a 2013 “junk science” law that allows Texas inmates to potentially challenge convictions based on advances in forensic science.
After the issuance of the subpoena, the Office of the Attorney General instantly issued an appeal which was in collaboration with the district court judges who had a temporary injunction that stopped Roberson’s execution. It has been learnt that after the state’s highest criminal court agreed with the attorney general’s office, allowing Roberson’s execution to continue, lawmakers then solicited their case to the Texas Supreme Court.
The high court presently has been made up of nine Republican-elected justices has agreed to stop the execution without specifying the time it would have lasted. Currently, the issue of separation of power is dominantly litigated through the courts.
The lawmakers and Attorney General Ken Paxton have been in a war of words in the public over the issue in contention with each of them accusing each other of misrepresentation of the case with making public their case and issuing rebuttals of the claims that have been made.
Roberson, who is positioned to become the first person in the U.S. executed in a shaken baby case, has claimed his integrity in his 2-year-old daughter Nikki’s 2002 death.
At the time, doctors and law enforcement quickly concluded she was killed as a result of a violent shaking episode, leading to his conviction at trial, but Roberson’s defence says a new understanding of so-called shaken baby syndrome shows that other medical conditions can be factors in a child’s death, as they believe it was in Nikki’s.
A disclosure from the office of the attorney general last month has revealed that the lawmaker has at several times tried to issue some misleading comments that Roberson was unfairly convicted through ‘junk science’ concerning ‘shaken baby syndrome.
Roberson’s defence team originally pursued to have him entranced from his prison north of Houston to Texas’ capital of Austin to be questioned by the House committee, but legislators instead wanted to gather his testimony from where he is imprisoned.
The attorney general’s office failed to make any comment regarding the case and misunderstanding that have existed between the lawmakers with the Supreme Court ruling in place. The possibility of allowing Roberson to make his testimony is still unclear or he will be allowed to seek a death warrant.
Gretchen Sween, Roberson’s lawyer, expressed that she is optimistic that the state will work with the legislators to still allow for Roberson to testify.
Gretchen Sween stated that the ancillary benefit to Mr Roberson of staying his execution hopefully gives time for those with power to address a grave wrong to see what is apparent to anyone who gives the medical evidence fair consideration
His daughter Nikki’s death was a tragedy, not a crime; Robert is innocent, Sween said in a statement. Sween further noted that given the overwhelming new evidence of innocence, they asked the State of Texas to refrain from setting a new execution date.
