A recent op-ed by Theodore Shaw, pres­i­dent and direc­tor-coun­sel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, urged a full and fair inves­ti­ga­tion into the case of Ruben Cantu, a Texas man who may have been inno­cent of the mur­der for which he was exe­cut­ed in 1993. Shaw not­ed that Cantu’s case was ​“fraught with sys­temic errors,” includ­ing the fact that his con­vic­tion was based on a sin­gle eye­wit­ness iden­ti­fi­ca­tion by a man who has said he was pres­sured by police. Shaw praised the work of the Houston Chronicle, which inves­ti­gat­ed Cantu’s case last year and pub­lished a series of sto­ries about his pos­si­ble inno­cence. He also stat­ed that Texas must take a clos­er look at Cantu’s case to ​“avoid ter­ri­ble mis­takes in the future.” Shaw stat­ed that the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund hopes that their efforts to pub­licly post mate­ri­als that first inter­est­ed the group in Cantu’s case, and also prompt­ed them to con­tact the Chronicle, will spark a fur­ther inquiry by the state. Shaw wrote:

DURING my 24 years as a staff lawyer and now as pres­i­dent and direc­tor-coun­sel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, I have worked on many cas­es. Our job is to con­front injus­tice, so we see a lot of the legal sys­tem at its worst, in Texas and across the coun­try. But we also often see the legal sys­tem at its best. Over the years, I have devel­oped a high regard for the legal insti­tu­tions of the state of Texas when they oper­ate at their best.

We saw the worst in Tulia, where sev­er­al dozen poor African-American defen­dants were sen­tenced to long terms in prison in 1999 on the basis of the uncor­rob­o­rat­ed word of a sin­gle under­cov­er nar­cotics offi­cer. Our orga­ni­za­tion took their cas­es and dis­cov­ered that the offi­cer had fab­ri­cat­ed the evi­dence, lied in court and caused the con­vic­tions of innocent people.

While a rem­e­dy to the injus­tices in Tulia did not come swift­ly or eas­i­ly, the Texas legal sys­tem ulti­mate­ly worked to cor­rect those mis­takes. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals appoint­ed a respect­ed retired judge from a dif­fer­ent coun­ty to han­dle the cas­es; that judge con­clud­ed that the con­vic­tions were based on per­jury and rec­om­mend­ed that they be reversed; the Legislature unan­i­mous­ly passed spe­cial leg­is­la­tion to per­mit the imme­di­ate release of those who were still in prison; and in August 2003, Gov. Rick Perry par­doned 35 Tulia defendants.

We may be see­ing the worst of the Texas legal sys­tem again, but this time in a case in which the stakes were life or death. After the Tulia cas­es, the Legal Defense Fund under­took an inves­ti­ga­tion into the pos­si­bil­i­ty that Ruben Cantu, who was sen­tenced to death in San Antonio in 1984, was inno­cent of the mur­der for which he was exe­cut­ed in 1993. Once we start­ed look­ing into the case, we were imme­di­ate­ly trou­bled by what we found.

The Cantu pros­e­cu­tion was fraught with sys­temic errors. Perhaps most egre­gious was the fact that Cantu was con­vict­ed on the basis of a sin­gle eye­wit­ness iden­ti­fi­ca­tion, which was giv­en under tremen­dous pres­sure from police (accord­ing to the eye­wit­ness) and which was sub­se­quent­ly recant­ed. Mistaken eye­wit­ness iden­ti­fi­ca­tion is the lead­ing cause of wrong­ful con­vic­tion in this coun­try. In some cas­es, mis­tak­en con­vic­tions are revealed by DNA or oth­er foren­sic evi­dence, but unfor­tu­nate­ly for Cantu, none was avail­able in his case.

The Legal Defense Fund has inves­ti­gat­ed poten­tial wrong­ful exe­cu­tions in a few oth­er cas­es. But uncov­er­ing the real facts in these cas­es is extreme­ly dif­fi­cult and cost­ly. In one case, that of Larry Griffin in St. Louis, Mo., we had the assis­tance of a Chicago law firm, with whose gen­er­ous help we com­plet­ed the inves­ti­ga­tion to our sat­is­fac­tion, and pre­sent­ed the chief pros­e­cu­tor, the Circuit Attorney for the City of St. Louis, with per­sua­sive evi­dence that Griffin was in fact inno­cent of the mur­der for which he was executed.

In the Cantu case, despite a sub­stan­tial com­mit­ment of resources, more work remained to be done. We shared the infor­ma­tion we had with inde­pen­dent jour­nal­ists at the Houston Chronicle. After review­ing our infor­ma­tion they decid­ed that the case mer­it­ed full inves­ti­ga­tion. They did an award-win­ning job of pur­su­ing the inves­ti­ga­tion and pub­lished their find­ings in a series of arti­cles last November. Their sto­ries revealed strong new evi­dence of Cantu’s innocence.

The Houston Chronicle looked into this case to deter­mine whether a man exe­cut­ed by the state was inno­cent. Compelling evi­dence that they uncov­ered sug­gests that he was. Whether this is true, and, if so, how such a mis­car­riage of jus­tice could have occurred are ques­tions that must be addressed in an open and unbi­ased inves­ti­ga­tion by an appro­pri­ate arm of the state gov­ern­ment. Unfortunately, to date, the state has respond­ed most­ly by issu­ing or threat­en­ing unwar­rant­ed sub­poe­nas, includ­ing to the newspaper itself.

We don’t think this course of action helps answer the ques­tions at hand. In order to focus the inquiry back where it belongs, we are post­ing on our Web site (www​.naac​pldf​.org/) the mate­ri­als that first inter­est­ed us in the case and prompt­ed our dis­cus­sion with the Houston Chronicle, so they are avail­able to all who are inter­est­ed. We hope this access to infor­ma­tion opens up the dia­logue and sparks a full, fair and seri­ous inves­ti­ga­tion into this case.

The NAACP Legal Defense Fund is opposed to cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. We came to that posi­tion in the 1960s, in large part because of the long his­to­ry of racism in the use of the death penal­ty against African-Americans and oth­er minori­ties. However, our posi­tion on cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment is not at issue in the Cantu case. Whatever one’s views on the death penal­ty, no American favors exe­cut­ing inno­cent peo­ple. That is the issue here.

To avoid ter­ri­ble mis­takes in the future, we must face up to the mis­takes we may have made in the past — as the state of Texas did in Tulia — with­out fear of what we may find.

Houston Chronicle (May 11, 2006). See Innocence and Editorials.

Citation Guide