I believe I can fairly say that no one is more regretful about the erroneous information I gave in the Estrada case than I am. I would like those who happen upon this to know that over a year ago, as soon as the Bexar County prosecutors made me aware of the situation, I acted to take responsibility and immediately completed an affidavit about the circumstances surrounding the testimony in the case. There is no place for any blame other than on my own shoulders.

The information I testified to, regarding G3 custody of capital murderers, was actually correct according to the copy of the TDCJ Classification Plan that I had in my possession. The information I gave the jury was found on pages 74 through 76 of the Plan, and specifically the information that promotion up from G3 was possible, was outlined on page 76, paragraph (4). Page 74, Section III, subsection A(3) of that same Classification Plan provides that an inmate convicted of capital murder could not be promoted to G1 status, but does not prohibit promotion to G2 status.

That was the crux of the testimony that we now know was incorrect. At the time of the Estrada case, the prison had changed their classification protocol regarding convicted capital murderers serving Life Without Parole, but I had not received the new information from TDCJ. However, I would point out that the 2003 edition of the Plan that I talked about is still being used by TDCJ. The exception is that there are updates to the Classification Plan that are issued to prison classification employees in the form of supplements. I was never given the supplement with the update to the G3 custody provision and prohibition of capital murderers from rising above G3 status. I testified in good faith to what I believed was correct according to the prison regulations that I had in my possession and referred to frequently in my own work at the Special Prosecution Unit. Also, I testified in that case without any compensation from Bexar County, and had no financial or personal interest in the outcome of the case. There was nothing in the way of personal gain to me by testifying in that case.

Since learning of the Estrada case situation, I have made a point of talking about this case and my testimony in Estrada, in lectures to prosecutors, and in pre-trial conferences where I was asked to testify in capital trials. I have never denied or shirked my responsibility or tried to diminish my culpability in this case.

I did not want to let this situation lie fallow and appear to pretend it didn't exist or slink back into the shadows and hope nobody noticed it.
The appellate system worked for Estrada -- he is getting a new hearing. And I don't know if the media or those of the defense bar who have made known their contempt for me will admit it, but he was not within a few steps of the gallows when revelation broke through the clouds and exposed his torturous treatment by the State. However, if my information is what convinced the jury that he should be sentenced to death, and the information was wrong, then Estrada should be given a chance to be judged according to correct testimony.

So with that said, I would sincerely express to prosecutors that if you have pending capital cases or are faced with them in the future, perhaps you should call someone else in our office or look elsewhere for punishment testimony. I will be happy to do what I can behind the scenes with providing information or direction or suggestions on whom to call. But I don't know if my presence at your courthouses would serve you or your cases well.

I would be happy to talk to anyone about this, from either side of the docket. Feel free to call or email.

A.P., I don't think that anyone who knows you or regularly sees these forums would ever doubt that you testified to what you believed to be the absolute truth at that time. And that you acknowledge the error is just further testimony of your impeccable character. You will always have my complete respect.

And those rules will no doubt change again in the future, likely to relax the supervision of lifers.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gretchen:
A.P., I don't think that anyone who knows you or regularly sees these forums would ever doubt that you testified to what you believed to be the absolute truth at that time. And that you acknowledge the error is just further testimony of your impeccable character. You will always have my complete respect.

---

The only thing I can add to Gretchen's comment is that I do know you personally, and I know you quite well, better than most of the other members of this association.

You are a man of integrity and you are a man deserving of our complete and utter respect. It takes a big man to admit a mistake, and a bigger man to make a post like you did here.

That capital defense attorneys and the anti-death penalty ilk don't like you, to me, is like a badge to be worn proudly. Unlike the subjects of these death penalty cases, and certain anti-death penalty advocates I know, YOU ARE man enough to admit you were wrong. You took proactive steps to announce your mistake to the world, knowing that a published opinion would certainly result and that your mistake would be known in the world of criminal justice.

I've heard it said by one criminal defense attorney blogger that rarely does a criminal case get tried when there is not a "hair in the soup". Certainly, this case was a serious matter to State and defense, defendant and victim's survivors alike, but thank God you had the integrity, courage and honesty to immediately correct your mistake and do everything you could to rectify it.

Those of us who know you well already know this, A.P., and I know I speak for many in this association when I say that this event does nothing but confirm the opinion we already had about you: that you are honest, that you have integrity and that you are unafraid to confront your mistakes.

That, friend, is the mark of a real man.

I don�t know A.P and I don�t know much about this issue about which he writes and testified but what I see is a man who owns up to a mistake and does so in a public professional forum made up of his peers, that in and of itself shouts out volumes about his integrity and professionalism. I don�t see much of that in any of the several defense bar cites and blogs I look at from time to time. A.P. it will be an honor to meet you some time.

AP, Thanks for always being willing to help those of us who need your expertise.You know you have the respcet from us little town folks who rely on SPU. If

What I don't understand is why would a DA get a request regarding changing a Death case to a Life from the Parole Board? Do they have that authority? What if I was busy and the Sheriff was out of town? Had we not responded would they have granted the Defense atty's request?? Pretty powerful job to have!!!! Appalled that all of a juries effort could be swept away. Please tell me it isn't so.

Hang in there AP. We love you!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fred Edwards:
I don�t know A.P and I don�t know much about this issue about which he writes and testified but what I see is a man who owns up to a mistake and does so in a public professional forum made up of his peers, that in and of itself shouts out volumes about his integrity and professionalism. I don�t see much of that in any of the several defense bar cites and blogs I look at from time to time. A.P. it will be an honor to meet you some time.

---

You're spot on, Freddie. I'll make sure you two meet soon.