Robert Roberson was sentenced to death in 2003, convicted by a jury that believed his daughter, Nikki, had died from shaken baby syndrome. That diagnosis has been so discredited that, according to the Innocence Project (IP), “The neurosurgeon whose paper first posited the SBS hypothesis later reviewed several cases of people asserting innocence and was struck by the number of cases where children had a history of illnesses, indicating their injuries were the result of natural causes, not abuse. In 2015, shortly before his death, [the doctor] told the Washington Post, “I am doing what I can so long as I have a breath to correct a grossly unjust situation.”
“At least 32 parents and caregivers in 18 states have been exonerated after being wrongfully convicted under the shaken baby hypothesis,” the IP says. And now, a growing number of legal scholars, lawyers, people of faith, abolitionists, doctors, scientists, celebrities, and most surprisingly of all, Texas legislators, are fighting to include Roberson in that group of exonerees.
Roberson was sentenced to death in Texas in 2003 for the death of his two-year-old daughter, Nikki Curtis, in 2002. Nikki had been chronically ill since birth, and while sick from a high fever, she fell out of bed. When Roberson found her lying on the floor, her lips were blue, and she was unconscious. He took her to the hospital, where, according to the IP, in a rebuttal to the Texas Attorney General’s statement about Roberson’s arrest and conviction, “There was no external blood, abrasions, or anything but minor bruises observed upon her arrival.” And, photos taken after she “had been resuscitated and intubated, do not show a battered child.” And medical experts who have examined Nikki’s medical records have determined that she died from pneumonia, exacerbated by the wrong medications.
Nevertheless, Roberson was arrested the day after he took Nikki to the hospital, accused of killing her on a shaken baby diagnosis. The doctor who concluded that Nikki had been murdered did so “without any understanding of Nikki’s complex medical history,” IP notes in its rebuttal, and “The grossly incomplete picture Dr. Urban had of Nikki’s medical history renders her opinions unreliable and invalid.”
Roberson has autism, and his lack of affect during the ordeal at the hospital before and after Nikki died was interpreted by law enforcement as a lack of concern or caring for Nikki on Roberson’s part. However, as IP also notes, “There is no record of violent acts in Robert’s extensive social history records,” and as for the witnesses who did testify that Robert had mistreated Nikki, “Before prosecutors and police put enormous pressure on these witnesses, none of these three had ever made any allegations that Robert had harmed Nikki in any way.”
During Roberson’s trial, IP says,”Faced with what was then believed to be proof beyond dispute, Mr. Roberson’s own defense lawyer agreed with the State that Nikki must have died from SBS. When Mr. Roberson refused to accept a plea deal, his lawyer argued only that Mr. Roberson had not meant to kill Nikki and that he was mentally impaired.”
But Attorney General Ken Paxton and Gov. Greg Abbott are hell-bent on executing Roberson despite the overwhelming evidence that Roberson had never abused Nikki, was an attentive single parent, and, most important of all, was convicted based on a thoroughly debunked diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome. The state ordered Roberson to be executed on October 17. The Texas Supreme Court stayed the execution, and a group of Texas legislators, alarmed by the myriad problems with this case, then held a public hearing during which lawyer-turned-crime writer John Grisham, TV psychologist Dr. Phil McGraw, and Roberson’s legal team all testified on his behalf.
Also testifying was a juror on Roberson’s case, who contradicted AG Paxton, who’s now insisting that Roberson was found guilty of beating Nikki to death, not of causing her death by SBS. Terry Compton said the prosecution based its whole case on Nikki having died from SBS — including a demonstration in court of a rag doll being violently shaken to demonstrate what they said Roberson had done to Nikki — and no evidence of Nikki’s long medical history was ever introduced. “That is all that this case was based on is SBS,” she said.
“Knowing what you know now, did the jury get it right?,” Rep. Brian Harrison asked Compton. “No sir,” she answered. “Knowing what you know now, do you believe Robert Roberson murdered his daughter, Nikki?” he asked. “No, sir,” she answered. “How sure?” He asked. “100 percent,” she answered.
And when he asked Compton how she felt about Paxton releasing a statement headlined, “Office of the AG Sets the Record Straight About Nikki Curtis’s Death,” maintaining that the jury convicted Roberson of beating his child to death, not of shaking her to death.
“It has pissed me off very much,” she replied.
In 2013, Texas passed a “junk science” law, that the Texas State Bar said was designed to “provide a specific legal avenue allowing prisoners to challenge potential wrongful convictions by showing that changes in the field of forensic science either seriously undermined the integrity of the criminal trials resulting in their convictions or else exonerated the prisoner completely.” Roberson should be able to challenge his conviction under the law, but as the Texas Tribune points out, “Roberson’s appeal has underscored the fact that Texas’ highest criminal court has never granted a new trial to anyone on death row under the junk science law.”
