Supremes hit homer in Escobar case

| January 13, 2023

Especially if you live in Texas, you know the Austin PD DNA lab has had SERIOUS problems in the past. This case concern an Areli Escobar, who went to death row based on the DNA’s lab reports.

After Escobar was convicted in 2011, the police department’s DNA laboratory was closed following a state investigation that showed evidence of widespread errors and bias.

Escobar was convicted based on 1) His then-girlfriend thought she heard him having sex when she called him.  2) He had a few blood spots on his clothes that day, which he said had happened in a bar fight.

At trial, with no eye-witnesses to the crime, prosecutors were heavily reliant on DNA evidence analyzed by the Austin Police Department’s own laboratory as well as a private laboratory.

The jury was told that samples taken from Escobar’s clothing showed that Maldonado’s DNA “could not be excluded as a contributor.” Jurors were also told that Escobar’s DNA similarly could not be excluded as a contributor to DNA evidence found at the scene of the crime.

A state judge in 2020 ruled that Escobar deserved a new trial because “newly available scientific evidence demonstrates that the DNA evidence relied upon for this conviction was scientifically unreliable,” in part because there was evidence of “suspect-driven bias.”

Meaning that whatever the PD wanted for DNA results, they got.

Prosecutors accepted that finding and notified the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which was reviewing the case. But the appeals court in a January ruling nevertheless upheld Escobar’s conviction, saying in part that his lawyers had not shown that the DNA evidence is his specific case was flawed.

Here’s where it gets messed up… even the prosecutors said the evidence was not certain, but the court upheld the death sentence. So they are basing his conviction and execution on what, his girlfriend thinking he was having sex with someone else?

At the Supreme Court, Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza, representing the state, urged the justices to rule in Escobar’s favor. Prosecutors “offered flawed and misleading forensic evidence” that was “material to the outcome of his case in violation of clearly established federal due process law,” he wrote in court papers.

NBC News

Me, I’m all over the death penalty: it is society’s only 100% prevention for recidivism and should be applied to major or career criminals far more often. Major Hassan? Dead meat. Fentanyl dealers? String ’em up. But sending someone to ride the Needle Express based on weak sauce like “cannot be ruled out” with no other real evidence? That just weakens the whole basis for the death penalty.

Got a problem with it? Retest the evidence on modern equipment. At least get it right.

Category: Crime, Death penalty

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
President Elect Toxic Deplorable Racist SAH Neande

And have the evidence retested in a not-in-the-same-jurisdiction lab. Remove the bias.

A Proud Infidel®️™️

Hell, have it tested in two labs independent of each other if the guy’s on Death Row.

Anna Puma

While we are at it, make the judges re-take the Bar Exam and give them a drug test.


Especially, the ethics exam. Contrary to popular belief, there is an ethics portion of the multi-state bar exam lawyers must pass.


I note, FIRST (oops, wrong thread), that this is Austin, a septic-blue stain on Texas, and the politicians in the PD are what floated to the top of the septic tank.

I have no clue why the Texas Supreme Court ruled against him. Not what I expected from them.

Not about to invite Escobar to the family picnic, and 100% support the death penalty, but the safeguards must be observed against all abuse.


The Texas Supreme Court did not rule against him. They ruled in favor of him and reversed the court of appeals decision affirming his conviction.


I misunderstood then.
That’s more in line with what I thought the Texas Supreme Court would do.

I plead insufficient coffee, y’honor.

Old tanker

Frankly, I avoid Austin just like california. I refuse to support the city in any way. Just a crap load on the entire state.

I agree, given the paucity of actual evidence and the lack of an “eye witness” other than a pisssed off girlfriend, there is no reason not to cut the guy loose. Weak tea indeed.


We do a little historical parody skit that is based in “Turnipseed County”. The court system is ruled by Hizz Diss Honor Judge “You Ain’t Got Enough Cash” Turnipseed. Ably assisted by his 6th Cousin 9th Removed, The High Sheriff “YouCan Bribe” Turnipseed. If we don’t have anything to charge you with we’ll trump (see what I did there) some charges up. And if evidence is needed, we can manufacture it. The prosecution team is Messrs Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe. Didn’t realize our court records had become a how to book for other jurisdictions.

Get it right dumbasses, THEN give the dirtbag a trip to Hell.


A.long time ago WVA went through something similar. They weren’t even testing the samples because the guy wasn’t qualified to do so. Just sending back whatever the cops wanted to.hear.


Travis County DA Jose Garza is still trying to railroad SGT Daniel Perry.

And let’s not forget Travis County DA’s have a history of bringing politically motivated prosecutions/persecutions.
See Ronnie Earle and Rosemary Lehmberg


Travis County DA is a DA.


But sending someone to ride the Needle Express based on weak sauce like “cannot be ruled out” with no other real evidence? “

Maybe I just saw this on a TV show and don’t understand the terminology, but my understanding of DNA evidence is that the “can’t be ruled out” language is legalese in the sense that there is no way to get a 100% match, so they try to rule people out instead of prove this DNA belongs to that person. My understanding is that it only takes a tiny percentage of difference (something like a .002%) to rule someone out, so saying that someone “cannot be ruled out” means that there’s something like a 99.998% probability that this is the guy.

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong.

With that said, considering that the Texas forensic lab was proven to be inept, corrupt or both during the period this guy was convicted, I’d say throw out the conviction and give him a new trial.