Lawyers for Daniel Perrys allege political expediency by District Attorney Garza in letter to clemency board

[ad_1]

Austin, TX, 47 seconds ago Travis County District Attorney Jos Garza and lawyers for Daniel Perry wrote letters to the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles as the seven-member panel reviews the governor’s request Greg Abbotts to recommend a pardon for Perry, who was convicted last week of first-degree murder.

After about 17 hours of deliberation, a Travis County jury found Perry guilty of murdering Garrett Foster, an Air Force veteran who was protesting police brutality in downtown Austin with a group other protesters in July 2020. Perry claimed to have shot Foster in self-defense after Foster threatened him. him with an AK style rifle. The jury found Perry not guilty on a charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Abbott tweeted within 24 hours of the guilty verdict that he would immediately approve a pardon if the board recommended one. The Texas Constitution does not allow the governor to grant a pardon of his own volition. Perry faces life in prison but has not yet been sentenced.

The governors’ announcement follows a trial in which the lead detective who investigated the case, David Fugitt, was called by the defense rather than the prosecution. Fugitt, who has decades of experience and solved the vast majority of cases he investigated while with the Austin Police Department, told the jury this was the first time this had happened in his career.

Garza asked to appear before the council to present some of the evidence that led to Perrys’ conviction and urged council members to consider other factors.

Before making a decision, I implore you to review the trial transcript, trial officials’ evidence that may impact public safety, and seek input from the victims’ families on how a pardon can affect them, Garza wrote.

In response to Garzas’ letter, defense attorneys Doug OConnell and Clint Broden outlined some of their concerns, including Judge Clifford Brown’s decisions to exclude trial evidence that may have shown Foster may have been the first aggressor.

OConnell and Broden, who also filed a motion for a new trial, discussed the alleged misconduct of a substitute juror, who may have participated in deliberations with nonverbal communication, according to an affidavit from one of the jurors.

Alluding to Garza’s letter and his recent media tour, they pointed out that Abbott and the board are legally authorized to grant a pardon.

So to the extent that people disagree with Texas’ clemency process, it would seem that their disagreement should go toward an effort to change the Texas Constitution, they wrote.

OConnell and Broden also reiterated their claims of political prosecution and pointed to other evidence that they say favors their client.

We stand ready to explain to the Council the tortured nature of this case and the political machinations that resulted in the case even being brought to trial, the lawyers wrote.

As the Board will no doubt learn, the lead detective in this case was barred by the Travis County prosecutor from mentioning a large amount of exculpatory evidence to the grand jury who considered the case in the first instance.

Fugitt accused Garza of tampering with criminal witnesses in August 2021.

Below are copies of both letters.

[ad_2]