Texas Schedules Back-to-Back Executions of Prisoners Who Claim Innocence

Texas has sched­uled exe­cu­tions on con­sec­u­tive nights of two pris­on­ers who have long assert­ed their inno­cence. Troy Clark (pic­tured, left), who is sched­uled to be exe­cut­ed on September 26, 2018, was con­vict­ed and sen­tenced to death based on the chang­ing state­ments of a for­mer girl­friend who could have faced the death penal­ty under the Texas law of par­ties but was tried as an accom­plice and sen­tenced to 20 years in prison. Daniel Acker (pic­tured, right), sched­uled to be exe­cut­ed September 27, was con­vict­ed and sen­tenced to death based upon since recant­ed foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny that he had stran­gled his girlfriend. 

Clark was con­vict­ed of the 1998 kid­nap­ping and mur­der of Christina Muse in Tyler Texas, and pros­e­cu­tors have also accused him two oth­er metham­phet­a­mine-relat­ed mur­ders. He has no legal chal­lenges pend­ing and his clemen­cy peti­tion was turned down by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles on September 24. Clark alleges that he was set up by his girl­friend, who ini­tial­ly told police that anoth­er mur­der vic­tim was respon­si­ble for Muse’s death and then lat­er gave police a state­ment say­ing she had killed Muse out of jeal­ousy and that Clark was not involved. Clark also argued in an unsuc­cess­ful habeas cor­pus peti­tion that his court-appoint­ed coun­sel at tri­al and in the post-con­vic­tion process failed to inves­ti­gate and present mit­i­gat­ing evi­dence — includ­ing men­tal health evi­dence relat­ed to fetal alco­hol syn­drome — that he says could have per­suad­ed the jury to spare his life. 

Acker, who also main­tains his inno­cence, was con­vict­ed of stran­gling his girl­friend, Marquetta George, and dump­ing her body. He does not deny involve­ment in her death, but alleges that she jumped out of his mov­ing car dur­ing an argu­ment and died acci­den­tal­ly, like­ly hav­ing been struck and killed by a pass­ing car. Acker’s attor­neys have filed appeals say­ing that his tri­al was taint­ed by the court’s exclu­sion of evi­dence, and the inclu­sion of ​“false,” ​“mis­lead­ing,” and erro­neous foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny. The pros­e­cu­tion changed its expla­na­tion for George’s death after a state med­ical exam­in­er admit­ted in a 2011 evi­den­tiary hear­ing that she had not been stran­gled. Instead, the pros­e­cu­tion argued for the first time that Acker pushed George from the truck. ​“He didn’t have the phys­i­cal abil­i­ty to stran­gle her while he was dri­ving,” Acker’s attor­ney said, and had no motive to kill George. 

The Texas par­dons board has also denied Acker’s appli­ca­tion for clemen­cy. On September 21, he filed a peti­tion for review and a motion to stay his exe­cu­tion in the U.S. Supreme Court, argu­ing that due process is vio­lat­ed when ​“a State has repu­di­at­ed a false the­o­ry of crim­i­nal lia­bil­i­ty on which it based a death sen­tence, but intends to car­ry out that sen­tence based on a new the­o­ry of lia­bil­i­ty” that was nev­er pre­sent­ed to the jury. Texas has already exe­cut­ed eight peo­ple in 2018.