Man with autism faces execution Oct. 17, 2024

Post Reply New Topic

Was putting his baby daughter in a red ant bed some form of "treating her himself"?

He wasn't very kind to his wife, either. Roberson strangled his ex-wife with a coat hanger. Roberson punched her in the face and broke her nose while she was pregnant. Roberson beat her with a fireplace shovel.

As for the baby, he changed his story multiple times. He even claimed that the blunt force injuries were due to his daughter hitting the bricks in floor of the bedroom. One problem with that is there were no bricks -- the bedroom was fully carpeted.

He murdered the girl. It as no accident and it wasn't pneumonia.

Here is a letter from the medical examiner in the case:

https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/si ... 202016.pdf

She has far more credibility than anyone who claims that the twerp was innocent.

Roberson is a liar. Look at how often he changed his story about the murder of the girl:

Shaken baby syndrome does not leave "clear impact wounds".

Whoo...Hoo. this guy , i guess appears by what I have read here, will be getting what he deserves..very Nice
when all facts are available ..!

That's why a new trial is probably the right call with all the relevant information. Being convicted of the wrong crime, even if the right sentence for what was done results, is still a miscarriage of justice. At bare minimum, a different sentence is likely more appropriate.

There is no miscarriage of justice. He was tried and found guilty by a jury of his peers. They heard the evidence, not the clowns posting things on-line saying he is somehow innocent. And after hearing the evidence, they found him guilty.

If you think that he is some kind of loving father, then how would you have felt if your father whipped you for crying, put you in an antbed, bounced you around the house, and sexually assaulted you? How many trials do you think he deserved?

The alternative is to eliminate police, eliminate courts, eliminate juries, and let the evil people in the world do whatever they want without punishment. Is that what you want?

It was announced a little while ago that Roberson's execution has been cleared to continue.

If you're so convinced that he's truly guilty and that the sentence is appropriate, why are you so afraid of him. The legal system in the US is set up to try and avoid having people sentenced for things they didn't do or where there isn't a proper trial.

In terms of the list, that's not relevant to the question at hand as none of that carries the sentence of death. There's a decent chance that he'd already be out of prison for some of that.

As far as the innocence project goes, yes, they tend to post things about these cases that are opposed to the sentence, that's what they do, but when you've got the people involved in the investigation saying they got it wrong, that's something that should carry a lot of weight as it doesn't happen that often.

And yes, from what I've read, this was a miscarriage of justice. People should receive a fair trial and only be convicted of the things that they've done,without consideration for things that aren't related to the charges that the proceedings cover.

I saw that, it's somewhat troubling as the legislature should be able to get people like this in for hearings if the legislature thinks there's a compelling reason to have them in. The fact that he's on death row should really factor into the equation.

The guy was violent. He was violent to his wife while she was pregnant. He was repeatedly violent with the baby girl.

The medical examiner's autopsy showed blunt force trauma as the cause of death. If there had been sepsis or pneumonia as some claim, that would have been found, too. The cause of death was blunt force trauma.

I used to know one guy who was executed by the state and he truly deserved it for murdering a nice guy who stopped to help him. Roberson makes him look like one of the good guys.

I'm not surprised, at the end of the day, some of us value a justice system that worries about getting it right, and some don't. None of those other crimes would lead to capital punishment and from what I can tell, the trial was influenced by things that he wasn't being charged with.

You can argue about all those irrelevant details all you like, but the fact of the matter is that they are just that, irrelevant, they shouldn't have come up at all in any of this and his autism was relevant when it comes to what the final sentence was as it's fairly likely that he was being judged on that as much as any of the things that he actually did.

A retrial is really the right thing to do here, if he did the various things, then fine, resentence, if the state can't prove that his actions caused the death, then he shouldn't be punished for murder. Especially, if they can't prove that the kid was murdered. I obviously do not know him, but one of the big things about murder is that it requires intention and if he didn't intend to kill the kid or the state can't prove that he did, then it's not murder, it's manslaughter at best.

I think I'm probably done here as it seems like you're really invested in the idea that the courts don't have to adhere to any particular standards when trying and convicting people and I'm just not really interested in hearing about crimes other than the one that he was sentenced to being used as justification as to why the result was OK, when the lead detective disagrees that the result was the right call. That rarely happens, even when the person was completely innocent of all the charges.

Actually, I'm the one who wants standards for the courts. I want them to get it right and unless there is convincing evidence to the contrary, I am always going to side with the jury.

As far as the verdict in this case, do you really think that beating a two year old girl to death should not lead to the death penalty? Whether or not he has autism has no bearing on whether he should be held responsible for his actions.

If anyone is interested, here is a link to the decision by the Texas Supreme Court overruling the rogue committee:

https://law.justia.com/cases/texas/supr ... 884-2.html

So if a undiagnosed living alone make aspie , has a child , who is sick, and has tried several times at hodpitals to help the child .. And is not ginding any hope, so he probanly trys some different methods than conventional . And the poor child keeps crying and this fellow has no relief from the situation and might have been forced into a meltdown ..
There maybe very little accounting for his actions under those conditions.. And they are slready using circumstancial evidence to try him. Then all possibilities , might be fair game to judge him by ..
But somewhat it is suspect he got dx'ed after his arrest ...... If you met one Aspie , you have met omly one Aspie .?
( just doing that devils advocate thing )

Does "help the child" include beating her, whipping her, placing her in red ant beds, and sexual assault?

I could care less how sincere that some people claim he was. First of all, I don't see any sign of sincerity -- he had a history of violent behavior. Second, sincerity is almost surely the most overrated virtue. Nobody should get a free pass on anything major because you think that they were sincere.