IMO, this article isn't even really about the death penalty, or shouldn't be. > In Texas they’re getting ready to kill Robert Roberson next month. Roberson was

IMO, this article isn't even really about the death penalty, or shouldn't be. > In Texas they’re getting ready to kill Robert Roberson next month. Roberson was convicted of killing his 2-year-old child in 2002 [...] In the days before the child’s death, she was running a fever, and an emergency room doctor prescribed an antihistamine that can cause fatal respiratory distress in young children. > When Roberson brought her back to the ER, law enforcement officials didn’t like the way he was acting — unemotional and detached — and concluded it was evidence of guilt. It was likely evidence of his autism. > The detective who testified against him now realizes that and is urging clemency so that Roberson is not put to death for a crime that he did not commit and that did not even occur, because evidence suggests the child died from pneumonia and septic shock. But Roberson is scheduled to be put to death for shaking her to death anyway. If the author's description of the case is accurate, it really doesn't matter how you feel about the death penalty—you can replace "put to death" with "life in prison" and you're still left with an extreme miscarriage of justice. This person is very very obviously not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and he should be awarded his full freedom.