Former Prosecutor on Trial on Charges that His Misconduct Led to Wrongful Execution of Cameron Willingham

John Jackson, the for­mer Navarro County, Texas pros­e­cu­tor and judge, is on tri­al for ethics vio­la­tions in the 1992 cap­i­tal tri­al of Cameron Todd Willingham (pic­tured), which many believe led to the exe­cu­tion of an innocent man. 

Willingham was con­vict­ed of arson and mur­der and sen­tenced to death in con­nec­tion with the house fire that killed his three young daugh­ters. Texas exe­cut­ed him in 2004. Willingham’s con­vic­tion and exe­cu­tion rest­ed on two key pieces of tes­ti­mo­ny: arson tes­ti­mo­ny — since dis­cred­it­ed as junk sci­ence — claim­ing that burn pat­terns in the house estab­lished that an accel­er­ant had been used in start­ing the fire, and a state­ment by prison infor­mant Johnny Webb claim­ing that Willingham had con­fessed to him while the two men were both in the coun­ty jail awaiting trial. 

In July 2014, The Innocence Project filed a com­plaint against Jackson with the Texas State Bar stat­ing that the pros­e­cu­tor had ​“vio­lat­ed core prin­ci­ples of the legal pro­fes­sion, and did so with ter­ri­ble con­se­quences … the exe­cu­tion of an inno­cent man.” The Project argued that Jackson should face sanc­tions for fal­si­fy­ing offi­cial records, with­hold­ing evi­dence from the defense, sub­orn­ing per­jury and obstructing justice. 

Based on those alle­ga­tions, the Texas State Bar brought ethics charges against Jackson, who faces a rare pub­lic tri­al for that mis­con­duct. In that tri­al, attor­neys for the Texas State Bar allege that Jackson coerced Webb to tes­ti­fy, offered Webb a reduced sen­tence on an aggra­vat­ed rob­bery charge, did not dis­close the deal to Willingham’s defense, and know­ing­ly elicit­ed false tes­ti­mo­ny from Webb claim­ing that he had not been offered any ben­e­fit for his testimony. 

Correspondence between Jackson and Webb shows that Jackson peti­tioned state offi­cials on Webb’s behalf and even­tu­al­ly used a legal process intend­ed for cor­rect­ing cler­i­cal errors to reduce Webb’s rob­bery sen­tence. Webb has described in inter­views and depo­si­tions how Jackson con­vinced him to false­ly tes­ti­fy against Willingham. Webb recount­ed one con­ver­sa­tion with Jackson in which ​“He said, well, let’s go over [what] I think needs to hap­pen. He says I’ve got this guy Willingham who did this. We know he did it. We know he’s guilty. We just can’t prove it.” 

Of Webb’s rob­bery charge, Jackson alleged­ly told Webb, ​“even if you’re con­vict­ed now, I can get it off of you later.” 

The Intercept reports that, since 2013, rough­ly 10 pros­e­cu­tors have been sanc­tioned in cas­es brought by the Texas State Bar, and only three pros­e­cu­tors have opt­ed, as Jackson has, to have their cas­es heard in pub­lic by a jury, rather than in pri­vate by a pan­el of lawyers. 

[UPDATE: On May 11, 2017, a Navarro County jury vot­ed 11 – 1 that Jackson had not com­mit­ted mis­con­duct in the Willingham case.]