In new legal filings, attorneys for death row inmate Robert Roberson argue judicial bias robbed their client of a fair trial. The accusations are part of a Notice of New Evidence filed with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
Roberson was convicted in 2003 of murdering his 2-year old daughter, Nikki, the year before. Last week, Roberson’s attorneys filed a judicial misconduct claim with the CCA, arguing Roberson’s parental rights were violated when a judge granted Nikki’s grandparents the authority to decide whether she should be removed from life support.
However, it wasn’t until Nikki’s grandfather, Larry Bowman, went on Lester Holt’s podcast, ‘The Last Appeal,’ that Roberson’s attorneys learned the name of the judge who gave that authorization. On the podcast, Bowman told Holt it was Judge Bascom Bentley who told the hospital he and his wife were authorized to make the decision whether to remove Nikki from life support.
Bentley, who passed away in 2017, is the judge who presided over Roberson’s capital murder trial. At the time Nikki was removed from life support, Roberson had not yet been charged with a crime.
“Matter of fact, Judge Bentley told them we were the parents,” Bowman said on Holt’s podcast.
“Did you have to make the decision to take her off support?” Holt asked.
“Yeah,” said Bowman.
“In doing so, Judge Bentley, circumvented Mr. Roberson’s rights as Nikki’s sole managing conservator and thus the sole individual with legal authority to make that decision,” Roberson’s attorneys wrote in their filing.
The misconduct claim is the latest in a string of attempts to stop Roberson’s Oct. 16 execution.
“There are many things wrong with this case that warrant a new trial, but this alone, I mean it shows bias, it shows the prejudgment, it is misconduct,” said State Rep. Lacey Hull/(R) Dist. 138. “This man has never had a fair trial. Robert has never have due process and that’s why we are saying he needs a new trial.”
Hull is among a coalition of voice calling for Roberson to be given a new trial. This effort is supported by Crime Stoppers of Houston.
“We’re of the perspective that Robert Robertson deserves a new trial. We’re not saying he needs to be released, we’re not even saying he needs to be commuted. But from his original trial to where we are now, it’s like night and day,” said director of victim advocacy, Andy Kahan. “Let’s do what we should do, analyze the facts, and the facts were not presented to the original jury.
In 2002, an autopsy determined Roberson’s daughter died of blunt force trauma due to shaken baby syndrome.
However, Roberson’s attorneys argue evidence not presented at trial shows Nikki died from pneumonia, complicated by “inappropriate medications she was prescribed.”
Roberson’s attorneys also argue the science used in 2002 to determine Nikki died from shaken baby syndrome was flawed and updated scientific consensus debunks the original diagnosis. Roberson’s attorneys also said they have evidence debunking claims of physical and sexual abuse.
Victims’ Rights advocate Andy Kahan said Crime Stoppers of Houston is not calling for Roberson’s release, but believes the information brought to light warrants a new trial.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton stands by Roberson’s conviction. However, the lead detective in the case at the time, Brian Wharton, has since stated he believes Roberson is innocent.
Roberson was scheduled for execution in Oct. 2024, but a last-minute subpoena from a House committee examining his case led to a stay and a battle between the executive and legislative branches of state government.
The Texas Supreme Court eventually ruled while lawmakers have the right to subpoena death row inmates, such a subpoena would not be allowed to again block a scheduled execution.
Anderson County District Attorney Allyson Mitchell asked the AG’s office to take over the case in June. The following month the AG’s Office successfully argued for a judge to set a new execution date.
Last year the Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence committee was investigating why the state’s so-called “junk science” law was not working as intended. This law was passed in 2013 to provide an appellate avenue for those convicted on flawed or outdated forensic science.
Lawmakers on the committee were trying to understand why Roberson’s appeal based on this law did not trigger a new trial.