Dr Phillip McGraw is testifying at a Texas legislature hearing regarding the case of Robert Roberson, an autistic death row inmate whose life was spared last week after lawmakers subpoenaed him to testify on Monday.
Roberson, 57, has been blocked from appearing at the hearing in-person.
McGraw, the TV doctor and chat show host known as Dr Phil, holds a doctorate degree in clinical psychology has interviewed Roberson in prison.
“I am 100 percent convinced that we are facing a miscarriage of justice here,” McGraw told the committee. “I do not believe that Mr Roberson has had due process in this case.”
He continued telling the nine members of the committee that he does not believe a crime occurred, a belief also now held by the former lead detective that prosecuted Roberson.
“If we are going to deprive someone of their life, that comes at a very high standard, a very high standard of proof, a very high standard of evidence,” McGraw said.
Roberson most likely would’ve been executed by lethal injection last week had the Texas House of Representatives Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence not issued a subpoena for his testimony as part of a hearing on whether Article 11.073, a 2013 state law dubbed the “junk science statute,” is being applied in criminal cases as intended.
The lawmakers, Roberson’s attorneys and McGraw say it has not been applied.
Several witnesses are scheduled to speak at the hearing on Monday, including a former state court of appeals judge.
Over the weekend, the state attorney general’s office announced it would allow Roberson to testify over Zoom, a decision in defiance of the subpoena, which states the respective parties must agree to alternative accommodations.
Roberson declined to appear virtually for multiple reasons cited by his attorneys, including his lack of experience using Zoom and his autism spectrum disorder. His attorneys argued the move would also deprive him of legal counsel.
The Independent has emailed the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and attorney general’s office for comment. During a district court hearing last week, the attorney general’s office acknowledged that the subpoena was lawful.
In 2003, Roberson was convicted of capital murder in the death of his two-year-old daughter Nikki Curtis the year prior. Prosecutors claimed Roberson murdered his daughter by shaking and striking her, resulting in blunt-force trauma, otherwise known as “shaken baby syndrome.”
He’s since claimed his innocence and a group of medical professionals recently told the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles they believed Nikki died from a combination of severe undiagnosed chronic viral pneumonia compounded by a secondary acute bacterial pneumonia that progressed to sepsis.
Roberson would’ve been the first person in the US to ever be executed in connection with the condition. The board unanimously voted against granting him clemency on Wednesday. The US Supreme Court said it couldn’t intervene.
A bipartisan group of lawmakers in a pro-death penalty state issued the subpoena that same evening. A Travis County judge granted a temporary restraining order stopping the execution on Thursday, when Roberson was scheduled to be executed.
In a dash against the clock, the Texas Attorney General’s Office appealed the court’s ruling in order to make sure the execution went ahead. The state criminal appeals court vacated the restraining order, also pressing for the execution to continue as planned. However, lawmakers who wanted to stop it then appealed that decision to the Texas Supreme Court, which granted the stay.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott, the only person with the ability to grant Roberson a 30-day reprieve, had not spoken out on the matter until Monday, when he asked the state supreme court to throw out the subpoena, stating that the power to grant clemency is his alone and lawmakers have “stepped out of line.” By issuing the subpoena, legislators effectively gave Roberson at least a 90-day stay of execution.
“If the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence thinks itself entitled to testimony from a criminal on death row, a point which is not conceded, it could have done so without erasing the authority given exclusively to the Governor,” Abbott wrote in a letter to the court.
“Only at the eleventh hour, when the Constitution empowers the Governor to make the last move, did the House Committee decide to violate the Separation-of-Powers Clause.”
The governor submitted the letter is support of a motion the attorney general filed with the court on Saturday asking to reverse the decision allowing Roberson to testify.
