Stay of Execution With Just Days to Spare!

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Stay of Execution With Just Days to Spare!"

Podcast: Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes Present
Host: iHeartPodcasts
Episode Date: October 9, 2025

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into the dramatic, last-minute stay of execution for Robert Roberson, a Texas inmate on death row for the murder of his two-year-old daughter, Nikki. The conviction, based on "shaken baby syndrome"—a diagnosis widely discredited in recent years—has drawn national attention, bipartisan support, and fresh legal proceedings. Amy Robach and TJ Holmes break down the latest developments, the shifting science underlying the case, complex questions of justice, and personal reflections on the broader implications for the criminal justice system.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Stay of Execution and Background

• [00:48]–[01:19]
  Robert Roberson, 58, was set for execution in one week (October 16), but the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals issued a stay.
  • TJ Holmes: "He was one week away from his execution date when a Texas inmate heard the words... they have stayed your execution."
• This is the second time in a year that Roberson’s execution has been halted.

The Flaws in "Shaken Baby Syndrome" Science

• [01:19]–[02:39]
  Roberson would have been the first person executed for a conviction based on shaken baby syndrome. The science behind his conviction is now considered “junk science.”
  • Amy Robach: "That's how flimsy and now really... unwarranted and baseless that science is that was used to convict him all those years ago."
• Texas law, passed in 2013, allows convictions to be challenged if the underlying science is later discredited.

Legal Maneuvering and Precedent Cases

• [02:39]–[04:58]
  Efforts to halt Roberson’s execution have been ongoing, with recent political maneuvers buying time for new legal reviews.
  • Amy Robach: "Certainly there have been so many people, from John Grisham to Republican lawmakers... all rallying because they believe this man... is innocent."
• The appeals court referenced the exoneration of Andrew Roark, whose conviction was also based on shaken baby testimony, as precedent.
  • Amy Robach: "The appeals court sent his case back and the D.A. decided to exonerate Andrew Rourke. And that is what the judge cited..."

Ongoing Debate and Family Dynamics

• [04:58]–[07:22]
  Despite expert agreement on the science, some family members, law enforcement, and medical practitioners still believe in Roberson’s guilt.
  The prosecution emphasized earlier medical findings and theories, but Roberson maintained his daughter was ill and suffered an accidental fall.
  • Amy Robach: "She had severe viral and bacterial pneumonia. She had been given drugs and prescribed drugs by doctors that are now no longer allowed..."

The Role of Autism and Emotional Perception

• [07:22]–[08:17]
  Roberson’s clinical diagnosis of autism, unrecognized at trial, contributed to misinterpretation of his behavior as evidence of guilt.
  • Amy Robach (on a detective recanting): "He believes he's innocent, that he was wrong, that he misinterpreted Robert Roberson's lack of... emotion..."

The Death Penalty Debate: Certainty and Justice

• [08:17]–[11:55]
  The hosts reflect on the risks of the death penalty in cases of disputed evidence.
  • TJ Holmes: "Isn't this the proof that this man shouldn't be executed, that everybody’s fighting about it this much? Clearly we're not 100% sure."
  • Amy Robach: "There's no taking it back... This is permanent. This isn't like, whoopsie, we put you in prison..."
• At least 40 parents and caregivers have been exonerated from shaken baby syndrome convictions since 1992.

The Importance of New Evidence and Fair Retrials

• [11:55]–[14:25]
  Roberson’s attorneys submitted testimony from 10 independent pathologists challenging the original autopsy and cause of death.
  • Amy Robach: "...10 independent pathologists... concluded that... the coroner's report... was not reliable."
• The hosts stress that juries today would have access to expert consensus and advancements unavailable in the early 2000s.

Allegations of Judicial Misconduct

• [16:03]–[18:54]
  A Dateline podcast revealed that the judge in Roberson's trial was involved in the decision to remove Nikki from life support—a potentially grave conflict of interest.
  • TJ Holmes: "...the grandfather... said that a judge called that hospital and told them that the grandparents were actually the parents and that the grandparents had the right to make the call to take the child off life support... That same judge ends up being the judge in his trial."
  • Amy Robach: "...it just screams of judicial misconduct."
• The judge who authorized Nikki's removal from life support later both signed Roberson's arrest warrant and presided at his trial.

Bipartisan Support for a Stay

• [18:54]–[19:49]
  Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle in Texas have united to support Roberson’s right to a new hearing.
  • TJ Holmes: "We're talking about Texas Republicans and Democrats working together. That should be enough to halt execution."
• The rare political unity strengthens the hope for Roberson’s supporters.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On flawed science and conviction:
  "That's how flimsy and now really... unwarranted and baseless that science is that was used to convict him all those years ago." – Amy Robach [01:19]

• On the stakes of the death penalty:
  "There's no taking it back. There's no exonerating someone. If you do it posthumously, the damage is done. This is permanent." – Amy Robach [09:06]

• On bipartisan unity:
  "Texas Republicans are working with their Democratic counterparts to save a man's life who's on death row." – TJ Holmes [19:25]

• On judicial misconduct revelation:
  "That same judge ends up being the judge in his trial. Now, as you're hearing those facts laid out, you might go, wait a minute, that doesn't sound right. Well, because it's not." – TJ Holmes [16:27]

• On expert consensus:
  "Ten independent pathologists... concluded that... the coroner's report... was not reliable." – Amy Robach [15:47]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:48 – Breaking the news of Roberson’s stayed execution
• 01:19 – Explanation of flawed 'shaken baby syndrome' science
• 03:42 – The 2013 Texas law on challenging convictions based on discredited science
• 04:58 – Andrew Roark case as precedent
• 07:46 – Autism’s impact on perception of guilt
• 09:06 – Risks and finality of the death penalty
• 14:25 – New evidence: 10 independent pathologists challenge conviction
• 16:27 – Disclosure of possible judicial misconduct from Dateline report
• 18:54 – Bipartisan Texas lawmakers unite to support a stay
• 19:49 – Reflections on justice, process, and the importance of certainty

---

Final Thoughts

Amy and TJ balance a detailed recounting of legal developments, emotional appeals for justice, and broader questions about the reliability of expert evidence in the criminal justice system. They foreground the evolving nature of science and law, emphasizing the necessity of certainty and fairness when life is on the line. This high-stakes, deeply human case serves as a springboard for larger conversations about the death penalty, judicial integrity, and the need for a justice system that adapts to new knowledge.

“We have to be sure. And if we can't be sure, yeah, it. I think that is just what most people who look at this case, even if they are pro death penalty, this is a very specific situation.” – Amy Robach [19:49]

Transcript

[Amy Robach]

This is an iHeart podcast.

[Maggie Freeling]

The murder of an 18 year old girl in Graves County, Kentucky went unsolved for years until a local housewife, a journalist and a handful of girls came forward with a story.

[Narrator/Voiceover]

America, y' all better wake the hell up. Bad things happens to good people in small towns.

[Maggie Freeling]

Listen to Graves county on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts and to binge the entire season ad free. Subscribe to Lava for Good plus on Apple Podcasts.

[TJ Holmes]

Hey there folks. It is Thursday, October 9th, and he was one week away from his execution date when a Texas inmate heard the words, I guess every death row inmate wants to hear, they have stayed your execution. And with that welcome to this episode of Amy and tj. Robert Robertson Rose We've been following this case for quite a while. Cannot believe here we are. He's supposed to be executed a week from today. He got news that's not going forward.

[Amy Robach]

Yes, October has been a scary but a good month for Robert Roberson because this is the second time in one year, in a period of 12 months where there have been interventions to stop an imminent execution. He would have been and if this is eventually to go through, he would be the first person ever executed after being convicted of shaken baby syndrome. That's how flimsy and now really they say unwarranted and baseless that science is that was used to convict him all those years ago.

[TJ Holmes]

Yeah, if you've been following this case, we certainly have. You've been keeping up with us on our morning run. But Robert Roberson, 58 years old, he was convicted of killing his own daughter, a two year old, Nikki. A story in the circumstances we'll get into. But he was convicted based on shaken baby syndrome. Well, a lot of that science has changed and if he were to go to trial today, they wouldn't be allowed to even use the same science that they used all those years ago to convict him. So he went before a court of appeals and that court of appeals has today come back and said we're going to halt your execution robes. They haven't said we are ending it or taking you off death row. They essentially said, nope, we're going to stop it until another court at least hears you out.

[Amy Robach]

Correct. And you know what, at this point, I think that's all his attorneys were trying to get. They were trying to get another court hearing. They ultimately want a new trial because without that evidence, it seems very unlikely that he would be convicted of killing his two year old daughter. Then two year Old daughter. And certainly there have been so many people, from John Grisham to Republican lawmakers in the state of Texas, along with their Democratic counterparts, all rallying because they believe this man, Robert Roberson, is innocent. And he has maintained his innocence from the very beginning. There have been several complicating factors that led to his conviction. All of them have been brought up. But it seems like the most compelling one with the court of appeals was this notion of a junk science being used to convict him. Because there is a law on the books in the state of Texas, it was passed in 2013, that allows a person to challenge their conviction if the science used to convict them has been discredited. That is clearly applicable to this case.

[TJ Holmes]

That's the case. I mean, I don't. That's not in dispute by anybody at this point. Right.

[Amy Robach]

And yet he hadn't been able to get a new trial. He hadn't been able to get this because the only way or the only reason why his, his scheduled execution was halted last year is because the bipartisan legislature decided to call him to testify. It was basically a maneuver to wait out the execution date. And they asked for him to testify, what, the week after his scheduled execution. And so because they did that and he never actually did testify, it. It pushed it to the next year.

[TJ Holmes]

So this guy, they kicked the can down the road there in Texas. So we got to the end of the road, or at least it was supposed to be next week, October 16, lethal injection. It was planned. He was supposed to die. Well, that's not going to happen. At least next week. We want to be clear here. They're not saying he is coming off death row. What they're saying here, at least this Texas Court of Appeals, is that, hey, the lower court, the trial court, you need to at least hear him out on his claims. Now, Robe, one of them has to do with the junk science. The other one had to do with somebody else who was also convicted under baby, shaken baby syndrome. And that person is out of prison now.

[Amy Robach]

Yes. So the judge referenced this case of Andrew Roark, who was convicted back in 2000 of injury to a child. And based on shaken baby syndrome testimony, he was sentenced to 35 years in prison. He also maintained his innocence from the beginning, saying he never hit or harmed his child. Last year, the court said, after hearing all the new evidence and certainly looking at the invalidity of the evidence presented in court at the time, they said he likely would not have been convicted today. So the appeals court sent his case back and the D A decided to exonerate Andrew Rourke. And that is what the judge cited when making the decision today about Robert Robertson.

[TJ Holmes]

Yeah, they were throwing this name around. I wasn't, I mean we're not familiar with Andrew Roark in that case necessarily, but they were throwing it essentially saying, wait a minute, we want that deal. That's all we're asking for. Do what you did with him, which is take a look at this junk science. The conclusion seems clear there. Now, Rhodes, we have to say there are plenty of folks out there and including the family of the little girl, at least the mom, some of them, yes. Are they? No. And there are some lawmakers, there are some still police, there are some doctors who say, yeah, shaken baby syndrome is a real thing. And this child in particular, Robes, I think it was the fact that little Nikki, two year old Nikki had some blunt force trauma. Now the explanation was she had fallen out of the bed and. But they, they thought she had been beaten.

[Amy Robach]

Yes. They said that they felt like because of the trauma to the head that he. She had been beaten or shaken. But his story, Robertson's story has stayed true and the same all these years, saying that she was ill. He had been taking her to the hospital. She had severe viral and bacterial pneumonia. She had been given drugs and prescribed drugs by doctors that are now no longer allowed to be prescribed to children because there's, I believe it affects their breathing. So it could stop your heart, literally could be a cause of death. And so you've got these medications, you've got this severe viral and bacterial pneumonia. And this was not a healthy child. She had been in and out of the hospital for most of her little life and then she fell out of the bed. And that's how he explains or at least that's what he says happened. And that would possibly be responsible for the blunt force trauma that they see.

[TJ Holmes]

Like you said, they, he's maintained his story throughout. So it's not just. Yes, they, they want the execution to stop, at least he and his attorneys. But they are, they absolutely are proclaiming his innocence. This is a case that's been going on. They want him out of prison, not just off death row and have maintained, retained this for a long time that this guy. And the other factor here, right, Robes, we discovered later that he is autistic.

[Amy Robach]

Yes. And so that was part of also the testimony used against him in his initial trial that he wasn't as emotional as you would expect a father to be whose daughter was just pronounced dead. And so that same detective who testified against him has now come out very publicly and often saying he believes he's innocent, that he was wrong, that he misinterpreted Robert Roberson's lack of empathy or lack of emotion and didn't realize that there was actually a clinical diagnosis behind why he acted and reacted the way he did.

[TJ Holmes]

That's incredible that something like that could factor into a man possibly being put to death. Like, I'm just not familiar. Who didn't know he was autistic. And he just. His emotional reactions were enough to make somebody think he was guilty. This case is absolutely. It is incredibly fascinating and we keep learning more and more and more about it. Ropes I'm still. As we go through. We've been talking about the death penalty more and more here lately, and I. I can't. Isn't this the proof that this man shouldn't be executed, that everybody's fighting about it this much? Clearly we're not 100% sure. And I say we talking about. Just as a society, shouldn't that be enough to say we're not in agreement and we have to be 100% sure, all of us.

[Amy Robach]

There's no taking it back. There's no exonerating someone. If you do it posthumously, the damage is done. There's no taking it back. This is permanent. This isn't like, whoopsie, we put you in prison, which is still significant. I mean, his attorneys point out that he has spent the last 22 years behind bars for a crime he didn't commit. And they have said that over and over again. And by the way, they also pointed to this statistic just for some perspective. Since 1992, at least 40 parents and caregivers have now been exonerated after they were convicted for wrongful shaking baby syndrome. So this is not unusual since 1992. So for over the past 30 years, 40 parents and caregivers have since been exonerated after they were already convicted.

[TJ Holmes]

His conviction was what year? I can't believe we don't know this off the top of our heads as much as we've been.

[Amy Robach]

I thought it was 2002.

[TJ Holmes]

That sounds right. Oh, 2002 is when Nikki died. Yes. So, I mean, this is right around that. I mean, it's. It's in. I just. If we get away from a moral question of the death penalty, and this is not a matter of I believe we should have it or I believe we shouldn't have it, we all agree that we shouldn't put somebody to death, that we are not 100% sure of. The guilt. The guilt at least. And it's just too much with this one. Rogan, some I guess on one side I might say, Well I am 100% sure. And the other side said, well, I am 100% sure too.

[Amy Robach]

But the question would be, given the information we know now that we didn't know at the time of his trial, would a jury of his peers find him guilty or innocent? And I think that's a fair question to ask now, 22 years later when we know more, it's, I mean I know this is a really bad comparison, but I think about college football and you know, a ref makes a call right there in the field, why wouldn't we want to go back now if we have better information to actually see if the, if the ball was out of bounds, if we can do that and then have a better clear understanding and then the ref can make a better choice based on better information? Why wouldn't we want that for somebody whose life is on the line?

[TJ Holmes]

Continuing with your football analogy, what if that play is the game winning one? Then the game's over after a call we didn't review. This is what we're talking about just in life and death now we have to have to be sure. Look, I'm glad no matter what, there are people who absolutely believe this man is a monster and he did something as heinous as it gets. We're talking about a two year old child who had health problems and they believe this man beat his child to death. And you have another side to this story and then you have science. And science was telling us Robe, something different today than it was telling us 30 years ago. And I think the law says we're supposed to listen, right?

[Amy Robach]

I believe that is what justice is. It's not about defending the fact that you thought you were right 30 years ago, but actually examining whether or not you truly were. That's justice.

[TJ Holmes]

And we're talking about where this case is now and all these developments that took place today. The court has stepped in and said, yes, we're going to stay the execution. But we haven't even told you, at least in this podcast about the other update. There was another huge development in this case this week, a development we thought was the one that might actually get him a stay of execution. All I know is what I've been told and that's a half truth is a whole lie.

[Maggie Freeling]

For almost a decade, the murder of an 18 year old girl from a small town in Grave County, Kentucky went unsolved until a local homemaker a journalist and a handful of girls came forward with a story.

[TJ Holmes]

I'm telling you, we know Quincy killed her.

[Maggie Freeling]

We know a story that law enforcement used to convict six people and that got the citizen investigator on national tv.

[TJ Holmes]

Through sheer persistence and nerve, this Kentucky.

[Amy Robach]

Housewife helped give justice to Jessica Curran.

[Maggie Freeling]

My name is Maggie Freeling. I'm a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist producer and I wouldn't be here if the truth were that easy to find.

[TJ Holmes]

I did not know her and I did not kill her or rape or burn or any of that other stuff that y' all said.

[Amy Robach]

They literally made me say that I took a match and struck and threw it on her. They made me say that I poured gas on her.

[Maggie Freeling]

From Lava For Good. This is Graves County, a show about just how far our legal system will go in order to find someone to blame.

[Narrator/Voiceover]

America, y' all better wake the hell up. Bad things happens to good people and small towns.

[Maggie Freeling]

Listen to Graves county in the Bone Valley feed on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts and to binge the entire season ad free. Subscribe to Lava for Good plus on Apple Podcasts.

[Amy Robach]

We continue our conversation now about this major development in the case of 58 year old Robert Roberson. He was convicted of murdering his two year old daughter Nikki. And the basis for that conviction was science that is now considered junk science. It's shaken baby syndrome. And after years and years, more than a decade of trying, his lawyers have finally gotten a stay of execution and a request for there to be a court hearing on this new evidence, for there to be a reconsideration of new medical information that has come to light concerning how and why this man was convicted. And in this appeal, this is really interesting, Robertson's lawyers included, along with that new scientific information that we now know, they actually say 10 independent pathologists looked at that original medical examiner's autopsy of little Nikki and they concluded that Nikki died. That the, the coroner's report that Nikki died from those blunt force head injuries, which is really what got him convicted, were not reliable. So 10 independent pathologists. So the defense really put on an incredible, I don't want to say show, but just produced a significant amount of evidence, enough to sway this judge for the first time in a long time.

[TJ Holmes]

And look, the, the other side will give you their witnesses and their experts and you're supposed to work all that out in court and let a jury decide. But again, the point here being the jury didn't get to hear some of the stuff we know now we know.

[Amy Robach]

Yes.

[TJ Holmes]

We just, we know more.

[Amy Robach]

And there's something else the jury didn't get to hear, and it's something that actually was made or I guess there was some light shed on it in a podcast just a few days ago, DATELINE podcast, where we heard from for the first time, Nikki's maternal grandfather, who told NBC's Lester Holt something we had not yet heard.

[TJ Holmes]

Yeah, we, we thought this was the thing right there was he's got so much Robert Robertson, so many motions out there trying to get the execution stopped. And we thought, okay, he's running out of options. Next week is going to be it. And then this DATELINE thing comes up where the grandfather on the little baby, Nicky's on the mom's side, said that he got a call when Nikki was in the hospital, that a judge called that hospital and told them that the grandparents were actually the parents and that the grandparents had the right to make the call to take the child off life support. And they did do so. That same judge ends up signing the arrest warrant for Robert Roberson. That same judge ends up being the judge in his trial. Now, as you're hearing those facts laid out, you might go, wait a minute, that doesn't sound right. Well, because it's not. First of all, only Robert Roberson had the right to make that call about that child. Yes.

[Amy Robach]

And then so beyond that, it just screams of judicial misconduct. You know, this is somebody who clearly was overly involved from the actual decision regarding her death to who to arrest and then presiding over and, you know, a judge again, to make another sports reference. But much like a referee can absolutely sway, a jury, can absolutely have an impact or an influence over how certain evidence is allowed, how it's received, how it's perceived, the juror instructions. There is so much influence that these judges have over these trials. So how could that possibly not be misconduct?

[TJ Holmes]

I was shocked to hear, I mean, you just go to the, I mean, again, she was on life support, so you, we have to assume they didn't think she was going to do well or maybe she wasn't going to make it. But still, someone made the call about the life and death of his child and he didn't get to that right there strips rights away from him and he has a case and a cause there. I, it's just too much. We, we're overwhelmed now with information of what the hell, and we can't trust that. But that expert trusts that it's too much. Just, I know they got to go through the legal process, but this seems, don't you think rope's going in the direction, even if it's not an exoneration, they got to get him off death row.

[Amy Robach]

It feels like that's where it's headed. And we actually, I mean, I again am no legal expert, but just having covered it the way we have, I am certainly hopeful that that is the outcome. And to know that ultra conservative Republican lawmakers from Texas who are very pro death penalty all joined forces with Democrats in that state after reviewing all of the evidence and the things that we are now explaining to you here, that they all were on board with getting him and actually creating a political stunt to make sure he wasn't executed with the little power that they had over the situation, I think speaks volumes.

[TJ Holmes]

Okay, I'm smiling. You said they pulled off a political stunt. It was a bipartisan political stunt, which is so rare. The last one there was one sided. We're talking about Texas Republicans and Democrats working together. That should be enough to halt execution. That Texas Republicans are working with their Democratic counterparts to save a man's life who's on death row.

[Amy Robach]

I need to hear that is all. Well, that's most of the proof that I need at this point. But again, certainly some news of relief for Roberson and his supporters. And I know some frustration for folks who think that this is exactly what should have happened and they're frustrated by our very lengthy process to actually go through an execution. But certainly one that has to be the case because of the something very much like this. We have to be sure. And if we can't be sure, yeah, it. I think that is just what most people who look at this case, even if they are pro death penalty, this is a, this is a very specific situation. So we will continue to follow any new developments, bring you the very latest. Thank you as always for listening to us. I'm Amy Robach alongside TJ Holmes. We'll talk to you soon.

[Maggie Freeling]

The murder of an 18 year old girl in Graves County, Kentucky went unsolved for years until a local housewife, a journalist and a handful of girls came forward with a story.

[Narrator/Voiceover]

America, y' all better wake the hell up. Bad things happens to good people in small towns.

[Maggie Freeling]

Listen to Graves county on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcast and to binge the entire season ad free. Subscribe to Lava for Good plus on Apple Podcasts.

[Amy Robach]

This is an iHeart podcast.