Makes you wonder...
Dec. 3, 2005, 8:00AM
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3499948.html
'Murder by perjury' in Cantu case?
By RICK CASEY
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle
Juan Moreno could end up making Job look lucky.
First, at the age of 19, he was shot nine times and left for dead in a 1984 robbery in San Antonio. A companion of Moreno was shot to death during the robbery.
Then, Moreno says, he was pressured by police into identifying the wrong man after repeatedly saying it wasn't him.
That man, Ruben Cantu, was executed based on Moreno's testimony in a 1985 trial.
Now Bexar County District Attorney Susan Reed says if her investigation supports Moreno's contention that the wrong man was executed, she may file charges against him.
For perjury? No. The three-year statute of limitations ran out a long time ago.
For the murder of Ruben Cantu.
Murder has no statute of limitations.
A passionate prosecutor
Cantu's lawyers, Gerald Goldstein and Cynthia Orr, say Moreno is courageous in coming forward after 20 years of feeling guilt to admit his role in the Cantu affair.
They describe him as a meek person who was, as a 19-year-old illegal immigrant, probably even meeker and therefore subject to pressure from police.
Reed, as passionate a prosecutor as Goldstein and Orr are defense attorneys, sees it differently.
"You guys," she says, referring to the Houston Chronicle and reporter Lise Olsen, who broke the Ruben Cantu story two weeks ago, "have put up a guy who says, 'I went into a courtroom. I lied. I knew I lied.'
"A man has been executed because of that lie. That is pretty serious stuff. There are consequences for that."
A scared, malleable kid
"If there were not consequences, then the system would allow itself to be attacked. The integrity of the judicial system is all based on truth, most importantly presenting the truth to the jury."
She said her office's investigation would also look at the behavior of the police, but she doesn't think their behavior would exonerate Moreno.
She pointed out that Texas law provides a defense for crimes committed "under duress."
But that defense covers only crimes committed "because (the accused) was compelled to do so by threat of imminent death or serious bodily injury to himself or another."
"It does not say the threat of deportation to Mexico," she said.
In fact, Moreno, who is now a legal citizen, denies police made that threat or any other.
The pressure was more subtle.
Defense attorneys Orr and Goldstein contend that Moreno was a scared, malleable kid, and the real culprits were the cops who pressured him.
Reed says that might make a difference in the punishment phase, but it does not relieve Moreno of responsibility.
"When you walk into that courtroom you walk in yourself," she said. "You sit in the witness stand and swear to God you're going to tell the truth.
"If his original thing was to tell the police what they wanted to hear, he had the opportunity to fix it in court. He then had 10 years (actually eight years before the execution) to fix it."
Ironically, the statute under which Reed says she would likely charge murder is the same one used here in Harris County to charge the Pasadena school bus driver for murder for accidentally running over a 9-year-old girl.
Under that statute, it is felony murder when, in the course of committing another felony (perjury, in this case) a person commits "an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual."
In Texas, I suppose, accusing someone of capital murder is clearly dangerous to that person's life.
I want to make one thing clear. Reed is not just focused on going after Moreno. Before she mentioned him in our Friday conversation, she said, "If your story is correct and (Cantu) is innocent, that means there is another murderer out there."
And she told reporter Olsen that if the story is correct, it demonstrates a nonfunctioning justice system.
But Reed is ready to punish perjury partly as a deterrent.
There's one problem. By doing so, she could also be deterring others from confessing that, under pressure from police, they gave false testimony.
Would that make the justice system function better?
Dec. 3, 2005, 8:00AM
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3499948.html
'Murder by perjury' in Cantu case?
By RICK CASEY
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle
Juan Moreno could end up making Job look lucky.
First, at the age of 19, he was shot nine times and left for dead in a 1984 robbery in San Antonio. A companion of Moreno was shot to death during the robbery.
Then, Moreno says, he was pressured by police into identifying the wrong man after repeatedly saying it wasn't him.
That man, Ruben Cantu, was executed based on Moreno's testimony in a 1985 trial.
Now Bexar County District Attorney Susan Reed says if her investigation supports Moreno's contention that the wrong man was executed, she may file charges against him.
For perjury? No. The three-year statute of limitations ran out a long time ago.
For the murder of Ruben Cantu.
Murder has no statute of limitations.
A passionate prosecutor
Cantu's lawyers, Gerald Goldstein and Cynthia Orr, say Moreno is courageous in coming forward after 20 years of feeling guilt to admit his role in the Cantu affair.
They describe him as a meek person who was, as a 19-year-old illegal immigrant, probably even meeker and therefore subject to pressure from police.
Reed, as passionate a prosecutor as Goldstein and Orr are defense attorneys, sees it differently.
"You guys," she says, referring to the Houston Chronicle and reporter Lise Olsen, who broke the Ruben Cantu story two weeks ago, "have put up a guy who says, 'I went into a courtroom. I lied. I knew I lied.'
"A man has been executed because of that lie. That is pretty serious stuff. There are consequences for that."
A scared, malleable kid
"If there were not consequences, then the system would allow itself to be attacked. The integrity of the judicial system is all based on truth, most importantly presenting the truth to the jury."
She said her office's investigation would also look at the behavior of the police, but she doesn't think their behavior would exonerate Moreno.
She pointed out that Texas law provides a defense for crimes committed "under duress."
But that defense covers only crimes committed "because (the accused) was compelled to do so by threat of imminent death or serious bodily injury to himself or another."
"It does not say the threat of deportation to Mexico," she said.
In fact, Moreno, who is now a legal citizen, denies police made that threat or any other.
The pressure was more subtle.
Defense attorneys Orr and Goldstein contend that Moreno was a scared, malleable kid, and the real culprits were the cops who pressured him.
Reed says that might make a difference in the punishment phase, but it does not relieve Moreno of responsibility.
"When you walk into that courtroom you walk in yourself," she said. "You sit in the witness stand and swear to God you're going to tell the truth.
"If his original thing was to tell the police what they wanted to hear, he had the opportunity to fix it in court. He then had 10 years (actually eight years before the execution) to fix it."
Ironically, the statute under which Reed says she would likely charge murder is the same one used here in Harris County to charge the Pasadena school bus driver for murder for accidentally running over a 9-year-old girl.
Under that statute, it is felony murder when, in the course of committing another felony (perjury, in this case) a person commits "an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual."
In Texas, I suppose, accusing someone of capital murder is clearly dangerous to that person's life.
I want to make one thing clear. Reed is not just focused on going after Moreno. Before she mentioned him in our Friday conversation, she said, "If your story is correct and (Cantu) is innocent, that means there is another murderer out there."
And she told reporter Olsen that if the story is correct, it demonstrates a nonfunctioning justice system.
But Reed is ready to punish perjury partly as a deterrent.
There's one problem. By doing so, she could also be deterring others from confessing that, under pressure from police, they gave false testimony.
Would that make the justice system function better?
