The Last Appeal — “I'm Astonished”

Podcast: The Last Appeal
Host: Lester Holt (NBC News)
Date: October 7, 2025
Episode Theme:
Lester Holt investigates the urgent case of Robert Roberson, a Texas father facing execution for the 2002 death of his two-year-old daughter, Nikki. The episode explores whether Roberson is truly guilty, scrutinizes the forensic evidence used in his conviction, and reveals new information the original jury never heard. Through interviews with key players—including Roberson's defense attorney, family, and a lead detective who now questions the verdict—the episode raises profound questions about justice, flawed science, and the potential execution of an innocent man.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Robert Roberson Maintains Innocence

• [01:01 - 01:13] Lester Holt conducts a direct interview with Robert Roberson:
  • Holt: “Did you harm your daughter Nikki?”
    Roberson: "No sir. I did not harm my daughter."
    Holt: “Did you ever violently shake her?”
    Roberson: "No, sir."
    Holt: “You did nothing that led to her death?”
    Roberson: "No, sir."
• Roberson insists Nikki fell out of bed and denies all accusations of violence.

2. Shaken Baby Syndrome: The Science and Its Collapse

• Background of the Conviction [03:29 - 04:59]:
  • Lead defense attorney Gretchen Swinn recounts how "Shaken Baby Syndrome" was crucial to Roberson's 2002 conviction.
• Origins and Public Panic [04:42 - 07:23]:
  • The "triad" of symptoms (brain swelling, bleeding on the brain, bleeding behind the eyes) was once considered definitive evidence of shaking.
  • The famous 1997 “nanny trial” of Louise Woodward boosted the diagnosis' prominence.
• Discrediting of Shaken Baby Syndrome [07:03 - 07:23]:
  • Dr. Norman Guthkelch, the theory's originator, publicly recanted:

    “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 Guthkelch, [07:03])

• New research showed similar symptoms could be caused by accidents, infections, or other medical events.

3. Texas’ “Junk Science” Law and Gretchen’s Intervention

• Legal Opening [07:31 - 08:10]:
  • In 2013, Texas enacted a “junk science writ” to allow new hearings if convictions were based on faulty scientific evidence.
  • With Roberson’s 2016 execution date looming, Swinn filed for a new hearing at the last minute—resulting in a stay of execution.

4. Nikki’s Overlooked Medical History

• Health Records vs. Family Testimony [11:03 - 13:50]:
  • Nikki’s grandparents recall her as healthy, but medical records indicate chronic illnesses:
    • Over 40 doctor visits
    • Sleep apnea, respiratory struggles, seizures, repeated serious infections.
  • In the week before her death, Nikki became gravely ill—trips to ER, high fevers, medications including Phenergan and codeine, both dangerous for sick two-year-olds.
• Medical Oversight at Trial [15:33 - 16:02]:
  • Medical experts later concluded Nikki’s symptoms and death could be attributed to her illnesses and the medications.
  • Gretchen:

    “All of her medical history was dismissed as minor, insignificant, not relevant ... That is completely contrary to contemporary medical understanding. It also wasn’t accurate.” ([15:42])

5. The Trial’s Failures: Defense, Evidence, and Narrative

• Defense Flaws [16:10 - 18:14]:
  • Original defense attorney Steve Evans failed to argue innocence, instead framing the case as accident vs. intentional shaken baby death.
  • He seems confused (and even troubled) to hear how he may have accepted the prosecution’s whole framing of the case:

    “I don’t believe it was a shaken baby case. And I’m astonished by what you’ve related of the transcript. I defer to the transcript, of course.” (Evans, [18:02])

• Holt reflects: Evans’ strategy hinged only on avoiding a death sentence, not on securing acquittal.

6. Portrait of Robert Roberson: The Man Behind Headlines

• Family Perspective [21:24 - 22:06]:
  • Brother and sister-in-law describe Robert as gentle and loving, bemused by the idea he could kill his child.

  • “If a person would kill a child, then why would they bring a child to the hospital?” (Thomas Roberson, [22:00])

• Defense Investigator’s View [22:44 - 23:40]:
  • Investigator Rex Olson recounts Robert's unusual, gentle demeanor and mental traits:

    “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.” ([22:58]) “There was a little taste of [Rain Man] with him, with Roberson. I don’t see him wanting to or really even go to hurt someone.” ([23:13])

7. Revelation of Robert’s Autism

• First Signs and Diagnosis [23:54 - 25:16]:
  • Swinn describes her early impressions:

    “He had this pronounced stammer and this sort of childlike way of speaking... it was like a light bulb for me.” ([23:54])

  • Neuropsychologist’s evaluation: Robert is autistic—takes information literally, doesn’t lie, shuts down under stress.
  • At trial, witnesses interpreted his “flat affect” as guilt; in retrospect, it was a symptom of autism.

  • “All of that means something different if you understand his disability.” (Swinn, [25:41])

8. Credibility of Accusations and New Testimony

• Testing Witness Testimony [25:41 - 27:41]:
  • Key prosecution witnesses (Robert’s girlfriend Teddy Cox, her daughter and niece) had histories of instability and mental illness.
  • Patricia Conklin (Teddy’s sister, a nurse) gives a sworn affidavit:

    “What I saw was a loving father ... He does not have a mean bone in his body. He is a little slow, but I never saw him be mean to anybody.” (Patricia, [27:18])

  • Patricia accuses Child Protective Services (CPS) of pressuring her and Teddy to accuse Robert under threat of taking their own children:

    “CPS came to me wanting me to report that I had seen Robert mistreating Nikki ... We were both threatened with having our kids taken away ... This pressure did not work on me. But Teddy is different. And when she’s scared, she tends to tell people what she thinks they want to hear.” (Patricia, [27:51])

9. Approaching a Tipping Point

• Building Belief in Innocence [28:20 - 28:43]:
  • Swinn becomes convinced: “No one believed him and that sickens me. I’ve always told him I’m not walking away from this.” ([18:57])
• Teaser for Next Episode [28:43 - 29:01]:
  • Next: Gretchen approaches the original lead detective who, as previewed, now expresses doubts about Roberson’s guilt.

Notable Quotes & Moments

• Dr. Norman Guthkelch, shaken baby theory’s creator, on wrongful convictions:

  “To go on to say, every time you see it, it’s a crime ... it became a sort of easy way into jail.” ([07:03])

• Attorney Steve Evans on his defense strategy:

  “If you admit shaken baby, you’re admitting the basically mechanics of death. ... You save their life. I still beat myself up as was there any other way?” ([17:13], [18:23])

• Gretchen Swinn on the overlooked medical evidence:

  “This child has been sick from day one. Isn’t that meaningful? ... That is completely contrary to contemporary medical understanding.” ([15:42])

• Patricia Conklin, defense witness and nurse:

  “He does not have a mean bone in his body. ... CPS came to me wanting me to report that I had seen Robert mistreating Nikki. ... We were both threatened with having our kids taken away.” ([27:18], [27:51])

Timestamps of Important Segments

| Timestamp | Segment | |------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 01:01-01:13| Roberson denies harming his daughter | | 03:07-04:30| Attorney Swinn’s background and entry into the case | | 04:42-07:23| History and debunking of shaken baby syndrome | | 07:31-08:10| Filing of Texas “junk science” writ to stay execution | | 11:03-13:50| Nikki’s detailed medical history and overlooked health issues reviewed | | 16:10-18:23| Analysis of defense strategy and Steve Evans’ admissions | | 21:24-23:40| Family and investigator describe Roberson’s gentle disposition and odd behaviors | | 23:54-25:41| Roberson’s autism diagnosis and reinterpretation of his behavior at trial | | 25:41-27:41| Patricia Conklin’s testimony undermines case against Roberson and exposes CPS pressure | | 28:43-29:01| Teaser: Interview with the detective who may now doubt Roberson’s guilt |

Conclusion

This episode systematically dismantles the case against Robert Roberson, highlighting critical scientific doubts about shaken baby syndrome, exposing overlooked or suppressed evidence regarding Nikki’s prolonged illness, and raising major alarms about the fairness of Roberson’s trial and the integrity of key witnesses. Through exclusive interviews and powerful firsthand testimony, Lester Holt and his guests suggest the possibility —and the tragedy— of Texas preparing to execute a man whose guilt is increasingly in question.

For further updates:
Next episode promises an interview with the lead detective whose views on the case may have changed dramatically—potentially a turning point in Robert Roberson’s last appeal.