A Texas death row inmate has been granted an eleventh-hour reprieve from execution as serious questions emerge about the controversial medical evidence that secured his conviction two decades ago.
Robert Roberson, who has consistently maintained his innocence in the 2002 death of his two-year-old daughter Nikki, was scheduled to die by lethal injection on Tuesday evening. However, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals intervened just hours before the procedure was set to begin.
Medical Controversy Takes Centre Stage
The court has ordered lower courts to re-examine several critical aspects of Roberson's case, particularly focusing on the evolving science surrounding shaken baby syndrome. This controversial diagnosis has come under increasing scrutiny in recent years, with many medical experts questioning its reliability.
Roberson's legal team presented compelling arguments that Nikki's death resulted from pre-existing medical conditions and accidental injuries, rather than deliberate abuse. They highlighted that the child had pneumonia, was heavily medicated, and fell from bed shortly before her death - factors they argue could explain her symptoms.
A Father's Desperate Account
According to court documents, Roberson brought his limp, unresponsive daughter to the Palestine, Texas hospital emergency room in January 2002. He told medical staff she had fallen from bed while ill. However, doctors observed no external injuries and became suspicious when Roberson showed what they described as a "lack of emotion."
Medical professionals at the time concluded Nikki's injuries could only have resulted from violent shaking - the hallmark of shaken baby syndrome. This testimony became the cornerstone of the prosecution's case during Roberson's 2003 trial.
Shifting Scientific Landscape
The appeals court has been asked to consider whether new medical evidence would likely convince jurors to acquit Roberson if presented today. Several prominent medical experts have submitted statements challenging the original shaken baby syndrome diagnosis.
This case joins a growing number of convictions being re-evaluated as the medical community's understanding of head injuries in children evolves. What was once considered definitive evidence of abuse is now subject to vigorous debate among paediatric specialists and forensic pathologists.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has not set a timeline for the re-examination of Roberson's case, leaving the condemned man in legal limbo while the fundamental science behind his conviction undergoes fresh scrutiny.
