I disagree with your assessment.
This is a great opportunity to take action on our platform. It does not call for us to weigh in on the evidence of the case. The letter is just asking to stop or delay the execution of this man. It does not muddy the waters and in fact gives us a great platform from which to speak on our opposition to the death penalty, specifically as it relates to the irreversible consequences when we trust a fallible state to determine who lives and who dies.
What I can agree with is that the death penalty is wrong. And that's why I believe it's important that we support efforts to curb and stop its use while we work to end the death penalty altogether.
Ok, so I actually read what we will sign. It is not opposed to the death penalty per se. The
entire letter is about how he was unfairly represented and wrongly convicted. There is not a single statement that opposes the death penalty. For any who didn't read it, and simply reacted to the issue of the death penalty, here it is:
Dear Governor Abbott, Chairman Gutiérrez, and Board Members,
As advocates for families across the Lone Star State, we applaud Texas’ long-held
commitment to protecting parental rights. At the same time, we are deeply troubled by
the October 17 th scheduled execution of Robert Roberson, a father who was wrongfully
convicted of killing his beloved two-year-old daughter, Nikki, in 2002. Mr. Roberson’s
case is littered with egregious errors, inaccuracies, and a blatant disregard for his rights
as a parent. We urge you to grant clemency or a reprieve to Mr. Roberson to ensure that
Texas does not execute an innocent man.
There is powerful medical and scientific evidence showing that Mr. Roberson’s
chronically ill daughter, Nikki, died of natural causes. The theory of “Shaken Baby
Syndrome” used to convict him over two decades ago has since been discredited through
new scientific study. This same evidence has led to the exoneration of over 32 parents
across 18 states who were falsely accused of child abuse and wrongfully convicted under
the shaken baby hypothesis. If Mr. Roberson is executed, he would be the only person
put to death on the basis of that flawed theory.
Mr. Roberson’s case also demonstrates a shocking disregard for his parental rights.
Abuse was the default – and wrong -- assumption before any determination was made
about Nikki’s medical condition. Mr. Roberson was viewed with suspicion from the
outset because of symptoms associated with his then-undiagnosed autism spectrum
disorder.
Because of these egregious factors, Mr. Roberson was denied the ability to see Nikki in
the hospital, and he was arrested before an autopsy was even performed. What’s more,
Mr. Roberson was not advised of any end-of-life decisions being made for Nikki despite
having full custody.
Texas has made great strides to curtail the issue of parents being falsely accused of
abuse. In 2021, Senate Bill 1578 was signed into law, giving parents accused of child
abuse the right to their own expert. This law was inspired by medically fragile children,
much like Nikki, who were wrongfully separated from blameless parents, and by
critiques of child abuse specialists' conflict of interests and lack of impartiality. This law
does not apply retroactively to Mr. Roberson, who would have greatly benefitted from
an independent expert in 2002.
A child’s death is always a tragedy. When a parent is wrongfully accused of causing that
death through abuse, the tragedy is compounded and magnified. Not only is the parent
grieving, they also are torn away from their remaining loved ones, often with
devastating consequences. There is no better example of this kind of injustice than the
case of Mr. Roberson. Moreover, fear of wrongful abuse allegations can cause broader
societal harms: parents may delay seeking care for sick or injured children for fear they
might be baselessly stripped of their beloved children.
Many factors contributed to Mr. Roberson’s wrongful conviction, including his
undiagnosed autism, the disregard for his rights as a parent due to false child abuse
allegations, and most notably, the popularity in the early 2000s of a now-debunked
Shaken Baby Syndrome theory. Given everything we now know about this case and
advancements in medical science, it is clear that no crime took place. Clemency is
necessary to prevent the irreparable harm of executing this innocent parent.
