Wednesday, November 23, 2005

Ruben Cantu Tragedy: The real killer is still out there

Texas' execution of Ruben Cantu for a crime he didn't commit demonstrates a profound disrespect for life by the criminal justice system -- for Cantu's, for the murder victim's, and for the safety of the rest of us who pay police and prosecutors' salaries. (The Houston Chronicle's Lise Olson reported this week that all the witnesses against Cantu have recanted, and most people involved in the case now believe he didn't do it.)

For Cantu, who was 17 when the crime was committed for which he was executed, the disrespect for life is obvious -- the government took the easy way out instead of doing their job. Police decided who they wanted to die for the crime before their so-called "investigation" even started, then railroaded a witness into accusing Cantu after he'd told them twice Cantu wasn't the guy. They never interviewed witnesses who could have provided Cantu with an alibi or even identified the real killer. The District Attorney failed to look for corroboration for the single eyewitness, ramrodding the conviction through despite the fact that false eyewitness testimony is the leading cause of wrongful convictions in the country. Nobody blinked. Nobody cared. They just wanted the conviction.

Nearly as grave is the disrespect shown to the murder victim and his family, who suffer a second indignation when the government casts aside accuracy in a rush to secure a conviction. Crime victims and their loved ones receive no benefit or satisfaction when the person punished played no part in the affair. Can you imagine how it must feel to find out so many years later not only that the killer wasn't punished, but someone was executed who wasn't responsible for your pain? It's unimaginable.

Finally, the case shows disrespect for public safety and for justice: After all, the real killer is still out there, unpunished for this heinous crime. You've got to wonder about prosecutors' priorities. San Antonio District Attorney Susan Reed sounded defensive and reticent to think about the implications:

"I found the articles very troubling," she said Monday. "I've always said it is not our goal that an innocent person will be punished."

However, "She is skeptical about recanted testimony," and expressed no concern that someone who committed capital murder might still be on the loose. She said she'd wait to consider it after her own office could investigate, but who knows how long that will take? The original crime happened nearly 20 years ago.

How can the public have faith in a criminal justice system that would allow this to happen? Who can believe that a system delivers true outcomes when it lets a single, uncorroborated eyewitness send a man to the executioner's table? (Or to prison for decades, as in the Tulia cases.) The shame from Ruben Cantu's unjustified death will haunt and reverberate through the Texas criminal justice system for years, and deservedly so. From all appearances, it's a tragedy of the highest order.

UPDATE: See additional blog coverage from Instapundit, Prawfsblawg, TalkLeft, Clayton Cramer, Doc Berman, and The People's Republic of Seabrook.

Cross-posted at the ACLU of Texas' Liberty Blog.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I ran across another article about a person in Texas who may have been innocent and executed. His name was Cameron Willingham and he was executed in Texas in 2004. The article was in The Chicago Tribune.

I think whether you are for or against the death penalty, there is a developing consensus that the way it is administered in Texas puts innocent people at risk of execution.

Here is a link to send an email to the Texas Legislature and Governor Perry of Texas urging them to enact a moratorium on executions, before any more innocent people are executed.

Gritsforbreakfast said...

Thanks! Checking back, I'd mentioned the Willingham case here. Plus, I know people who think Gary Graham was innocent, though I don't know enough about the details to have an opinion. And I know of lots of innocents convicted in non-capital cases under the same flimsy rules. The notion that death penalty cases would be exempt from Tulia-style wrongful convictions seems unlikely. Best,

Tami said...

And don't forget Frances Newton. She may or may not have been guilty but with a lawyer like Ron Mock she definitely didn't get a fair trial.

Aletha said...

HELP! I have a loved one incarcerated in a harsh prison in Texas. In his trial, 13 years ago,
his court appointed 'defense' attorney did not call a single alibi witness from the long list given to him. He was convicted from a hearsay source from a disgruntled ex-girlfiend. He has been abused and injured during his incarceration. I am despreatly seeking anyone, pro bono, anyone who can help revisit this case.
The real killer is still free. His name is known and his fingerprint was found at the scene. Please, reply if you can assist me in finding relief for this injustice.
Thank you and God Bless this message.
Aletha Rogers