Dateline NBC: “The Last Appeal”

Episode 2 – "I'm Astonished"

Date: October 10, 2025
Host: Lester Holt

Overview

In the second episode of “The Last Appeal,” host Lester Holt delves into the case of Robert Roberson, a Texas man on death row convicted of killing his 2-year-old daughter, Nikki. With just days until Robert’s scheduled execution (October 16, 2025), the episode examines the original investigation and trial, the controversial use of "shaken baby syndrome" as forensic evidence, and the efforts of Gretchen Swinn—Roberson’s dogged attorney—to prove his innocence. Through interviews with legal teams, family, and witnesses, Dateline unfolds a tangled narrative where outdated science, ignored medical history, and misunderstood behavior may have cost an innocent man his life.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Robert Roberson’s Claims of Innocence

• Robert maintains his innocence throughout the episode, insisting that he did nothing to harm Nikki.

• Lester directly questions Robert on the eve of his execution:

  • “Did you harm your daughter Nikki?” – “No, sir, I did not harm my daughter.” (01:15)
  • “Did you ever violently shake her?” – “No, sir.” (01:19)
  • “You did nothing that led to her death?” – “No, sir.” (01:22)

• Robert’s version: Nikki fell from bed and accidentally injured herself. He brought her to the hospital, but staff were immediately suspicious and involved police due to doubt about his explanation.

2. Shaken Baby Syndrome: The Science & the Doubts

• The prosecution’s case against Roberson leaned heavily on "shaken baby syndrome," specifically the classic “triad” of symptoms:

  • Swelling of the brain
  • Bleeding on the brain
  • Bleeding behind the eyes

• Lester Holt revisits the national spotlight on shaken baby syndrome, referencing the 1997 Louise Woodward "nanny trial"—a case that solidified the syndrome’s presence in the public imagination but also drew criticism for using junk science:

  “At her trial, Woodward’s attorney Barry Scheck argued that shaken baby syndrome was junk science." – Lester Holt (05:48)

• Even Dr. Norman Guth Kelch, the syndrome’s pioneer, later distanced himself from overreliance on this diagnosis:

  “To go on to say, every time you see it, it’s a crime. It became a sort of easy way into jail.” – Dr. Norman Guth Kelch (07:15)

• New research indicates the triad of symptoms could have other causes—falls, infections, or loss of oxygen—casting doubt on Roberson’s conviction.

3. Gretchen Swinn’s Fight for Justice

• Gretchen Swinn, Roberson’s attorney, emerges as the central figure challenging the case’s scientific and procedural integrity:

  “I just always had that hunger. I want to do something meaningful.” – Gretchen Swinn (03:19)

• She quickly became an expert in “shaken baby” science, uncovering that the diagnosis had since been discredited:

  “The shaken baby diagnosis used to convict him had been discredited.” – Gretchen Swinn (07:35)

• Leveraging a Texas law (2013) that permits re-examination of convictions based on “junk science,” Gretchen filed a writ just days before Robert’s execution—a move that stopped the execution and secured a new hearing for Robert.

4. Overlooked Medical History

• Gretchen’s team examines Nikki’s extensive medical history, contradicting the narrative of her being perfectly healthy.

• Nikki had recurrent infections, fevers, possible seizures, and sleep apnea.

  “I started looking. This child has been sick from day one… almost her entire life, starting at eight days old.” – Gretchen Swinn (11:21)

• Before Nikki died, she was very ill and prescribed Phenergan with codeine (now known to be dangerous for children under two). She had respiratory infections and several ER visits in her final days.

  “We’re talking about a two-year-old child who is having breathing difficulties. Both of these drugs, Phenergan and codeine, are associated with suppressing breathing and causing fatalities.” – Gretchen Swinn (13:20)

• At trial, this medical background was downplayed or ignored by both prosecutors and Roberson’s original defense.

5. Flawed Defense at Trial

• Roberson’s original lawyer, Steve Evans, failed to argue that Robert was not guilty.

• The defense echoed the prosecution’s theory of shaken baby syndrome, neglecting alternative explanations.

  “This trial was so fraught with due process problems. This guy never had a fighting chance.” – Gretchen Swinn (16:02)

• When confronted with his words in the transcript:

  “Yes, this is a shaken baby case, but no, this is not a murder case.” – Steve Evans (recalling his closing argument) (17:24) “I’m astonished by what you’ve related of the transcript. I defer to the transcript, of course.” – Steve Evans (17:45)

• Evans candidly discusses his priorities:

  “Here’s how you define a win in capital cases. You save their life... Because of the nature of the case.” (18:06)

6. Understanding Robert: Autism and Misjudged Behavior

• Family and friends describe Robert as gentle and loving, not violent.

  “If a person would kill a child, then why would they bring a child to the hospital?” – Thomas Roberson (21:30)

• Early defense investigator Rex Olson recounts Robert’s quiet, unthreatening nature:

  “He knew that child was injured, and he got up to the hospital. I’ve had two or three of those death cases. They never, ever do that.” – Rex Olson (22:28)

• Gretchen suspects, and confirms, that Robert is on the autism spectrum:

  “He’s like Forrest Gump. He has no guile. He does not lie. He takes everything very literally.” – Gretchen Swinn (24:06)

• Many interpreted Robert’s flat affect (lack of visible emotion) and odd actions (like not calling 9-1-1 or making a sandwich amidst crisis) as evidence of guilt, not realizing these were manifestations of autism—especially when under extreme stress.

7. Questions About Witness Testimony and Official Pressure

• Gretchen revisits key witnesses who testified against Robert, particularly his then-girlfriend Teddy Cox, whose reliability is questioned:

  “His girlfriend had never told anybody that Robert was abusive. She admitted on the stand she’d been hospitalized for mental health breakdown. Not a credible witness.” – Gretchen Swinn (25:48)

• The most explosive moment comes from Patricia Conklin, Teddy’s sister, who alleges that Child Protective Services tried to coerce both of them into testifying against Robert under threat of removing their children:

  “They were both threatened with having our kids taken away if we didn’t get on board with accusing Robert… Teddy is different, and when she is scared, she tends to tell people what she thinks they want to hear.” – Patricia Conklin (27:21)

8. Looking Ahead

• Gretchen remains committed to Robert’s case:

  “No one believed him. And that sickens me. I’ve always told him, I’m not walking away from this.” – Gretchen Swinn (18:40)

• The episode ends with Gretchen preparing to locate and interview the detective who led the original investigation, determined to question every aspect of the case.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “I almost cannot believe what I’m reading.” – Gretchen Swinn, on reviewing Nikki’s medical records (08:55, 15:53)
• “As a death penalty supporter myself, there are just way too many questions, way too many concerns for us to stay silent on this.” – Lester Holt (28:25)
• “He’s gentle and he worries more about you than he worries about himself.” – Gretchen Swinn (21:02)

Key Segment Timestamps

• 01:05 – 02:41: Lester Holt’s interview with Robert Roberson on death row
• 03:08 – 04:42: Gretchen Swinn’s background and legal journey
• 05:09 – 07:29: Discussion of “shaken baby syndrome” and its history
• 08:04 – 08:23: Filing the last-minute “junk science writ”
• 10:28 – 15:33: Deep dive into Nikki’s overlooked illnesses and dangerous medications
• 15:53 – 18:06: Flawed legal defense and attorney Steve Evans’ perspective
• 20:33 – 23:11: Family and investigator interviews challenging Robert’s portrayal
• 23:59 – 25:35: Discovery of Robert's autism and how it shaped misinterpretation of his actions
• 26:22 – 27:50: Patricia Conklin’s affidavit about CPS pressure
• 28:13 – 28:38: Preview of next episode and Gretchen’s continued investigation

Tone and Storytelling

The episode balances methodical investigative reporting with deeply personal accounts from Robert, his family, his legal team, and others. Lester Holt’s narration is thoughtful and empathetic, questioning previously accepted narratives and voicing concern over the reliability of the conviction and the fate of a possibly innocent man.

Conclusion

This episode of “The Last Appeal” weaves together emerging medical science, law, and the human stories behind a high-stakes death penalty case. It highlights the risks of wrongful conviction and the need for vigilant re-examination of old evidence as scientific understanding evolves. As execution looms, the team’s relentless search for truth continues, raising doubt and demanding justice.