Thursday, 15 May 2014

Robert Pruett - Did He Do It?

Robert Lynn Pruett
(Photo courtesy of The Express)

I first became aware of the Robert Pruett case around the same time most people in the UK did, when the documentary Life and Death Row was aired on BBC 3. A compelling documentary, the second programme centred on what is known as "Crisis Cases". These cases are when a death row inmate is looking at an imminent execution date and is looking for any and every kind of help he/she can get that may get them a stay of execution. Robert's case was featured alongside that of gang member Robert Garza. Pruett would eventually get a last minute stay of execution, while Garza went on to be executed.

Robert Lynn Pruett is 35 years old and he has been in prison since he was 15. Which means he has spent more of his life locked up than he did on the out. Pruett's original sentence was 99 years without parole. This was for the role he played in the murder of a neighbour. Although Pruett was not the person who stabbed the man to death, his father was, Robert was convicted under the "law of parties" act. This means if an individual is behind the events that eventually lead to the murder, they are held as culpable as the person who does the deed.


Four years into his sentence at a Texas prison, prison corrections officer Daniel Nagle was stabbed to death with a handmade shank (the name for an often crude weapon made by an inmate from everyday items). While there was no DNA or finger print evidence, a report written by the officer was torn up and strewn all over the crime scene. That report was actually a write up for a violation allegedly committed by Pruett earlier in the day. This write up is what is believed to have made Pruett angry enough to kill. Pruett denies murdering Officer Nagle and has always insisted he had never touched the report. Pruett's 21/05/2013 execution was stayed to allow for the evidence to undergo DNA testing. The results were inconclusive.


In Febuary 2014 Pruett was given a new execution date, 21/05/2014 - twelve months to the day of his first one. However, in April this execution date was also stayed to await further testing of evidence.


While there is no doubting Pruett's guilt for the original crime, many believe he is innocent in the murder of Officer Nagle. According to Pruett supporters he is the victim of "bent" correctional officers who wanted rid of Daniel Nagle because he was "by the book". While these allegations have never been proven, two correctional officers left their positions one month after the murder. Pruett's defence also points out that witness statements provided by other inmates are unreliable as many were offered privileges or even early release in return for their statements.


So, what do you think? Could Texas be wanting to execute the wrong man or is he truly deserving of the death penalty?


UPDATE - 

Robert Lynn Pruett is set to be executed April 28th, 2015. When this update went to publication, his appeals for a stay of execution had so far been unsuccessful. You can read more about Robert here.

The Allan B. Polunsky Unit
Home of Texas' Death Row
(Photo courtesy of Wikipedia)



64 comments:

  1. I don't think killing Robert Pruett will provide closure to his victims family, I don't think any execution does what the prosecutors promise families, but instead provides the "revenge" that appears to be the culture of the US.

    Having stated that, what EVERYONE leaves out of EVERY article, blog, document is the statements Robert made himself that hurt him the most. He stated and did not deny at trial "run that disciplinary case on me now, I'd like to call my first witness, oops he's dead".
    If you review the record carefully (as I have) it is painfully obvious from all perspectives that Robert had motive, means, and opportunity. However, to believe his defense "the other guy did it" would force you to believe in a massive conspiracy involving parties that had never met and had no dog in this fight.

    The jury got it right on guilt, however any jury that sentences any human being to die for his misdeeds has the same blood on their hands as any person who commits murder. (of course using the law of parties theory helps me come to this conclusion).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your comment and for sharing your opinion. I must admit the "Law of Parties" does not sit well with me at all. The death penalty, I absolutely get your point, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. The only thing that stops me from being totally against the death penalty is when you hear of small children being violated and murdered - often by the people they trust the most, the parents! It is these cases that make me thankful the DP is in play.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No he didn't do it. It's that simple, no DNA. While people say he had motive.....what....over a sand which, like Robert has said himself to me and many others, it's bullshit. How can someone who was meant to have sat on the victim in a messy stabbing frenzy NOT cross any form of DNA. Cut his thumb in the process, the weapon was present when the body was found. Even if it was a pin prick of DNA, blood from Roberts cut thumb, which they claim he did while doing the crime, it would have been found. You cannot convict someone in this basis. Worst conviction ever, and I will always believe my friend

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Was NOT messy, you clearly have not seen the crime scene photos. The victim died of a heart attack during the assault, no heartbeat to pump blood out of wounds. There is DNA but only one marker (considered inconclusive) but is a marker shared by both the victim and the convicted. Robert did not cut his thumb, it is more like a burn consistent with friction from a cloth surface, the photo of that injury is also in evidence.
      I understand it is hurtful to hear bad things about someone you care about, but this is a solid conviction.

      Delete
    2. Can I just ask where you saw these crime sceen photos? As I have been researching this case for quite a while now. I also sense that you are quite defensive and certain that Robert Pruett is guilty. I'm not sure if I am the only one here who is suspicious of your comments. I don't believe that the evidence that they have against Robert is hard evidence. Many people wanted Officer Nagle dead, Its a shame to say really, but there are just too many corrupt officers out there,

      Delete
    3. You too can find them, even on the internet. You will have to subscribe to PACER (Public Access to Courts and Electronic Records). I warn you there are voluminous and pricey. I was reimbursed for my purchase of the records.
      The main reason most cannot believe the evidence against Robert Pruett is "enough" to convict and or sentence to death is skewed by what is available to view on the internet. That would be some appeal briefs, and opinions. I too was concerned about this conviction at first, until I saw the whole of the trial as it was presented to the jury. I first ignored pre trial motions and only read what the jury heard, it was plain the evidence stacked.
      Then I read pre trial motions, sentencing reports, probation reports, incarceration records and not only plain to see why the jury convicted and sentenced as they did, but also why they were right.

      Delete
  4. Thank you for your comment All Pink Wonderland. It is always nice to hear an alternative point of view, especially from someone who knows Robert. The lack of blood on Robert's clothing and person is a MAJOR worry to me - I know a statement from an inmate inferred that he had seen Robert getting rid of bloody clothing BUT when I hear that many of the inmates were offered "sweetners" for their statements, it is hard for the average person to know what to believe. I will say I have read a lot of Robert's writings across the Internet and one thing he does come across as is calm - not the sort of trait you would expect from someone who is meant to be guilty of such a brutal crime. I hope your friend sees justice, Pink. Thanks for the comment.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If them clothes where there the would have been found to back up any theories they had, but they weren't. So they make up their own theories an there taken as bible, it's a joke. He is a very calm person, he doesn't want to be taken over by fear. He is very inspirational and he means the world to me, a friend I have come to love and care for so much. He's never in bad spirits, never angry, just an inspirational, happy guy. Right now I'm in the middle of a letter campaign to try to get some sort of awareness in Texas regarding Robert, that's where they need to be aware of what the state is doing. I will be visiting soon also, and I'll never give up fighting

    ReplyDelete
  6. He wasn't always such a 'calm' individual. This is proven in court documentation. Upon authorities taking him in for the officers murder, his statement was 'try filing that D.P on me now. My first witness I call is nagle, oh wait no he's dead' and then proceeded to laugh. He was sentenced to 99years previously for his neighbours murder, which also states several witnesses who testified that he tried to convince them to help in murdering him earlier that night to no Avail, during the murder he kicked, punched and held down the neighbour whilst he was stabbed according to witnesses. He also tried to escape upon authorites coming to arrest him, and talked about having witnesses murderer whilst awaiting trial.Upon sentencing he threatened to kill everyone, written letters bragging of his neighbours murder were also seized, Reports filed for being caught making shanks, threatening to kill other inmates. His record is endless, that goes completely against him being a calm individual. But draw your conclusions as you will. Maybe he is now but he is has been in isolation long enough to have no choice. Rewind a decade ago, around the time of the murder and he was a very angry young kid who had nothing to lose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is my cousin and I can assure you he was never a nice person. The fact that he is locked up is a relief to many. There is no doubt in many minds that he did exactly what he is accused of and probably many other things that have never come into the light.

      Delete
    2. I my don't understand where is the physical evidence to back up your claim of guilt. Whether you think he committed this crime is irrelevant. How,explain can some one be executed on someone else's thinking fall under hearsay. I myself have this gut feeling he was frame. Have you read of the corruption that was going on at that institution and even after Robert got wrongfully sent to death row the corrputioin continueed. Then the hit list that the officer Nagle was warned of. There is no way in hell Robert could have murdered that officer without living not a speck of his DNA at the scene. Years back, I had heard of this case and rumored was they had gotten the wrong guy. It until I got to see this case of this very informative devices that I knew this was the guy who had been wrongfully blamed for this awful crime because rumor was that it happened in McConnell,a very dangerous prison farm.

      Delete
  7. He was an angry kid I'm certainly not disputing that, he didn't have the best childhood. Them things he was meant to have said to nagle are speculation, testimonies from inmates, where is the proof he actually said that. There word against his, I get that, but there is no proof he did or didn't say that so it can't be taken as gospel, can it. There is no testimony that states Robert held down the neighbour, the only letter they had from robert was the letter asking an inmate if he remembered the day he hurt his hands on a weight machine. At the end of the day to convict someone of capital murder, you would need sold DNA evidence to back up any theories, to which they havnt got. Say what you will, but look at it logically. He can't be convicted of a crime there is no evidence for

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In the Yarborough case there absolutely IS testimony he held down, punched and kicked the neighbor while he was being stabbed. You can review BOTH trial transcripts (Yarborough and Nagle murder trials) via the County Attorney... you have to pay for them as I have, but you will see your facts are incorrect.

      Delete
  8. His father admitted that crime I am also friends with his brother, I know the details of that crime and they were not involved. Ribert admits he argued with him first but the stabbing had nothing to do with him or his brorher

    ReplyDelete
  9. I guess that all his 'friends' who testified he tried to recruit them to participate in killing his neighbour were lying that night? I guess too the neighbours who testified under oath, with nothing to gain, that he chased, held down, kicked and punched Yarborough are lying aswell right? All the reports on threatening staff with physical abuse, constructing shanks, fighting with inmates, dealing drugs, bragging of his neighbour murder, along with the rest of his prison record is all just lies aswell.His statement made about nagle was testified by authorities not inmates, but let me guess set up right? The clothes were actually stashed hidden in a port, which could easily be retrieved later on and washed. DNA were inconclusive being it does not mean his DNA wasn't there, he stabbed nagle up to 8 times, his thumb may have split on the last blow, probably the reason why he stopped, therefore it's not necessary true that DNA would transfer.obviously. This is the american justice system, no DNA is required in a case to send some one to the gurney! Many previous convictions have been sealed without DNA. You're perception of pruett is based on what he is or acts like now as opposed to how he was. To me it sounds like you have not read the facts, accessed the right documentation, read trial transcripts, instead listened to what ever your friend tells you that he is the victim in one, not wait two big set ups.

    ReplyDelete
  10. FYI.. He can't be convicted for a murder there's no evidence for? Correct me if I'm wrong but he has already been convicted for daniel nagles murder. And i have no doubt in my mind that that conviction will be upheld

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thank you for your comments, Candycanes and All Pink Wonderland, I really appreciate your input. I think it is important to clarify that Pruett has never shied away from his involvement in Mr Yarborough's murder. Despite the fact his father admitted to being the one who stabbed and killed him, Pruett has admitted his immaturity led him to wind his father up knowing he would go off like a rocket (from Robert's online writings). He was convicted under the Law of Parties and,although his 99 year sentence seemed OTT for a 15 year old, he has never blamed his father.

    The Daniel Nagle murder is the crime that saw Pruett get the death penalty and I must admit, I didn't realise there was zero DNA evidence to support the conviction. Walking away from such a bloody crime scene without so much as a spot on blood on you, even if you had changed your clothes, is surely a miracle. Add to that, the two officers who testified against Pruett and who confirmed what Pruett was meant to have said about Nagle, were long accused of being bent. This wasn't just by Pruett but other inmates, even Nagle himself had questioned the integrity of one of the guards just a couple of weeks before his death. Both guards left within a month of Pruett's conviction, which I have to admit is fishy. Did Pruett take the fall for a crime committed by one of the prison's own guards? People question why Pruett? Why not any one of the goodness knows how many prisoners in the hall that day.Well if it was really a guard, who would care which prisoner they chose to take the rap as long as it wasn't them.

    I am still undecided on Pruett's case, although I will admit I am glad it is getting a second look so to speak. Nobody should be put to death unless their guilt is known beyond all reasonable doubt.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Isn't that funny how inmates testimonies are considered hear say and can't be unreliable because there is apparently no evidence, yet people can listen to hear say that officers were bent and consider that even though there is no evidence to support it. Complete contradiction. Officers may have left because they were recieving little man power and attacks on officers were growing, nagle had complained himself about the lack of support. The risk was not worth their lives. What I find laughable is that a person is willing to believe an person, an inmate with a record as long as your arm of theft, drugs, assaults, threats and murder over officers that have no criminal records. And who said that pruett walked away from the scene without a drop of blood on him? I think people are making up what they want to believe now. His case maybe getting looked over by pro bono attorneys but so far each appeal has been denied, and they will keep making more weak claims that will keep being rejected. And that's the truth I'm afraid.

    ReplyDelete
  13. For your information I am not basing anything on the type of man he is now. I have seen the correct documentation. How is it that what we are saying is a contradiction, but what you are saying isn't? A capital murder case should not be based on what she said, he said and so on. If he is getting blamed for the crime, then sufficient evidence should be given to back it up. Yer so you saying he washed his clothes and cut his thumb on the last blow, right! Blood stained clothes where found in his cell, which he said he used to stem the blood from his thumb, they were tested and this was true. Now, in such a brutal stabbing, with a God awful crime scene, a drop, even a pin prick could have landed on him but it never. Why? Because he wasn't there. There is contradictions in his 5th circuit appeal, this is online if you would care to look. The time from when nagle was stabbed to when they put the prison on lockdown and apprehended Robert was to quick for any DNA to be covered up, you would also know this if you looked at the facts. Texas is the most corrup state, look at all the other inmates past and present who have been exonerated, for basically the fact there has been no evidence against them. Convictions may not need DNA evidence in order to be made, this is why men are innocently killed, because there not getting the correct, no shadow of a doubt DNA.

    So while you think it convenient to talk about the Yarborough murder, that's not what this is about. The fact remains, it's based on conflicting inmate testimony, and they were given bargains to do so, one inmate testified to getting a bargain, and that their is no DNA.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to rip apart your theory, but the victim died of a heart attack during the assault, this was not a particularly bloody crime scene. The thumb injury is not a "cut" but more like a burn from chafing and consistent with friction exposure to a "cloth like" surface.
      The prison was immediately placed on lockdown with the discovery of the victim. Investigators had questioned many inmates BEFORE they questioned Robert, and had information that led them to focus on Robert by the time he was questioned.
      There was NO conflicting inmate testimony, in fact the only inmate that was to testify on Roberts behalf was not allowed because he heard from someone else who heard that Robert didn't "do it", that is he said she said and hearsay of hearsay. As for looking at the facts, you clearly have your facts mistaken.

      Delete
  14. There was inmates willing to testify on Roberts behalf, however the prosecution said this was seen as speculation so it wasn't allowed. So the ones that testified against him............was that not speculation? The is holes in the whole conviction

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only inmate that was to testify on Roberts behalf, was prepared to testify that he heard that someone else heard that Robert didn't "do it". This testimony IS in the record but not in front of the jury as it is hearsay of hearsay.

      Delete
  15. It is absolutely necessary to touch upon the Yarborough murder as part of the prosecution used this incident to show that pruett is capable of premeditated murder and paints a picture of his character, a character that is capable of planning, carrying out and then lying about it. Every body wants to talk about what a calm nice individual he is instead of looking at who he was, and why he may have had the motivate, character and means to do it. I'm not saying I don't agree that captial cases should have DNA as it definitely builds for a stronger case but it is also possible and has happened where messy crime scenes have left zero DNA but it's still possible to secure a conviction beyond reasonable doubt without it. He has had long enough to sit around thinking of an answer for everything.we could debate this allday long but I am entitled to my opinion just as much as you are too. If I were you I'd get off this and start working on your campaign awareness, times a ticking and I'm pretty sure there's not many more appeals left right

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anyone is welcome to comment on the blog, whether their opinion is popular or not.
    Robert holds himself responsible for Mr Yarborough's death, accepting that he had wound up his father knowing he was bad tempered and violent. Did he deserve to be found guilty - Yes, but I am shocked a 15 year old boy was given a 99 year sentence. To assume a boy of 15 is completely beyond rehabilitation is shocking to me anyway. I have a son who is 15 and I would hate to think he would be thrown away at this age, knowing that in another ten years he will have matured etc. The Daniel Nagle murder is full of HE said, SHE said but that is no where near enough to warrant taking someone else's life. I am not disputing Pruett may have had a 'rep' for being violent, mouthy etc, again, this doesn't make him guilty of murder. The fact is this conviction, from the reams of information I have read for and against, is shaky at most.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well as there is no DNA evidence on this case that can give a certain answer to who was there for sure then what would you suggest they use to convict someone in a murder case when it is not available? They rely on testimonies from witnesses, past criminal records and behaviour records whilst detained in prison to determine it whether that person is capable of it. Pruett is a known liar, a criminal, a thief and had a history of aggression, simply a person who is crying wolf, a victim of a huge conspiracy. Prosecutions have been using other methods to convict someone long before DNA was available and yes this does run the risk of an innocent person being sentenced for something they did not do. Don't get me wrong, I do not agree with the 99year sentence that he got, nor do I agree with the death penalty for any one!! But I believe without a doubt that pruett is guilty of this crime. It is not envitable that pruetts blood would be found at the scene after cutting his thumb, if he wrapped his bleeding thumb immediately in his teeshirt to stem the blood then it wouldn't be at the scene, he also had enough time to walk away from the scene and was spotted by several inmates, all who were apparently to pruett given deals in return? But so far they have failed to produce any evidence to back up that claim. Everything about the case is apparently hear say, but pruett can't provide anything to prove he wasnt there. I hope he gets his time back in court to fight for his life, I really do, but I also think many of his supporters look at how he couldn't of done it as opposed to how he possibly could of.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is DNA evidence, that statement is false. The DNA evidence has shared markers between Robert Pruett and Daniel Nagle, however lacks sufficient markers to be professionally considered "conclusive".

      Delete
    2. Yes I am aware of this, what I meant was as there is no DNA that specifically indicates it was soley him

      Delete
  18. All I'm saying is his dad stabbed a man to death when angry over something so trivial, pruett was raised in that environment where you act with aggression, and furthermore spent his teens growing up in an environment, prison, where you act first and think later. It is more than possible that he followed in his own fathers foot steps and acted the only way he has been taught how to.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Its very easy to see the truth. Read his story. Read trial testimony. And as someone who lived in Cloverleaf. Went to TDC. Knew some people knew about first murder. Yes he killed Nagle. Guarantee as s former inmate when TDC was a lot more gangs in 80s. They wouldn't do that. Too much heat. Not way operate. Also why inmates testify. Not all inhuman. Even hard core inmate knows don't kill a guard. Inmate code doesn't apply. He says he was tired prison. Tried suicide earlier. He wrote in his story
    Then said exact words to inmate who saw him kill Nagle. He is just running the old inmate con. He wanted to die
    Now someone sends him money and attention so he playing all its worth. Been there invented the game. He is Guilty

    ReplyDelete
  20. Thanks for your honest comment, Tony Johnson. I really appreciate it, especially as you have first hand experience of the TDC. I know Robert, in his own eyes, had nothing to lose - he was serving a 99 year old sentence - death would be a welcome relief to many faced with that. The "Inmate Con" is interesting and definitely an angle to consider.

    ReplyDelete
  21. True had nothing to lose. But lots inmates doing 99 years. There called convicts. They don't despair. One more myth. Yes inmates testified got something in return. Happens everyday in every criminal court in America. Criminals testify against criminals. Ever heard Henry Hill? Sammy the Bull? Prison full people testified against others for deals. How it works. DNA. All said couldn't rule him out
    Palm print was Nagles. Corrupt guard? Lol. Think inmates lined up testify against Robert. Line been 2000 waiting testify against guard. Gang would care less there guard caught
    They just get another. Last thing they want is attention. Look his story. The WhiteNoys wanted him away from them. He said he wanted a war. He wanted someone end his misery. One way do it is act way he was. So when Nagle made him angry he acted
    Yes a man will kill over something so trivial. I do feel he was handed a rough hand. But he also had chances to fold it too
    Make no mistake. He is true Cloverleaf. TDC inmate. He wanted die. Now he will

    ReplyDelete
  22. Thanks for the info Tony. I didn't know the inmate/convict distinction, although common sense should of told me there are plenty of others with nothing to lose too. The gang stuff you mention is interesting and makes a much more sound argument than someone who just felt like their life was over. I obviously have no clue about gangs and prison but from what I have seen on the TV, they pretty much run the place. Do you have your own blog, Tony? I, for one, would find hearing more about your TDC experiences interesting. If you have, I will be happy to post about on my blog or follow you on Google maybe?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No I don't have a blog. I just became interested in this case. When someone that knew Ray Yarbrough told me about the Pruetts. I also knew some same people. I was Robert in the 80s. When Cloverleafand Channel view were let's say. To be young and nothing to lose was heaven. I went TDC sorry say more than once
      But after serving 3 flat years my last trip I walked away in 92 and changed my life. Robert had choices. He is being the use old con/inmate been going on years. He had chance give back that 99 years. People would have helped. But he made his choice. Shame is what all this is. I wanna tell kids like Robert a young Robert there is a way out. But now too late. My hope is a youngster growing up in Cloverleaf sees his story and learns. May be too late help Robert. But others can be by hearing my story and Roberts. What I feel bad about is I helped lay the footprints Robert walked in 10 years later. I hope that others choose not too.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for another great comment, Tony. I am genuinely interested in hearing your story. While you had a life like Robert's growing up and you made a few wrong decisions, your experiences seem to have shaped you into an understanding person who owns his mistakes and genuinely wants to help make things better for others. Trust me, there are people who haven't been within a mile of a prison cell who don't have those qualities. If you want to reach young people of the age Robert was, you came to the right place - the Internet. Get a blog, tell your story! You will have at least one guaranteed reader already! And you can't feel guilty for laying the footsteps ten years before another kid like you walked in them. After all, someone laid them for you! Looking forward to seeing more of your comments. Happy New Year!

      Delete
    3. I like to do that Believe I will. If my story can help one kid then its important

      Delete
    4. I welcome your comments and commend you for genuinely wanting to help other youngsters. While I recommend you tell your story via a Blog of your own, I am more than happy to publish anything you may want to write by way of a guest post. I look forward to hearing more from you.

      Delete
  23. I would like to clarify two points. Robert was already in prison, guards do not arrest inmates, instead it was the investigators sent from and commissioned by the Attorney General, that office was in fact already investigating corruption within the prison staff.
    Shortly after the murder (this was not a particularly bloody crime scene as the victim actually died of a heart attack during the assault, no heartbeat to pump blood equals a not so bloody scene), Robert and many others on the pod were brought to an area for questioning. They focused on Robert because they already had information from other inmates (you must read investigation notes to see this part). When the thumb injury was observed and Robert was questioned, his story did not match that of some 200 inmates that were out in the rec yard. Robert was arrested by the investigators and that is when he made his statement "Run that disciplinary....". It is in the trial transcripts, and for anyone interested in viewing the case as the jury viewed the case, I recommend viewing the trial transcripts.
    The states theory that Robert cut his thumb during the stabbing (not really a cut, it looks more like a rug burn). This theory is supported by the inmates who would if called testify that Robert was not on the rec yard, as well as inmates in the corridor who saw Robert.
    Lets review the testimony that was allowed and IS on the record, but was part of a hearing outside the presence of a jury. One inmate states that he overheard someone saying that they heard someone else did it. Of course the jury would not hear this testimony, it is actually hearsay of hearsay. Another line of questioning was not allowed to be pursued in front of the jury, and that was this "corrupt guards had motive" theory. It was the testimony of the Warden of the unit, the same warden who asked for the investigation into his officers. Defense tried very hard to develop this theory and the attorney of record has admitted that even his own investigators could not substantiate the theory.
    To the "there's no DNA" crowd. Let me preface this with, NO ONE should be murdered, whether it is the state carrying out an execution, or a murderer killing someone for whatever reason. There was DNA on the torn up report. To state there was "no DNA" is not only misleading, it is down right false. Here is what the DNA does tell us, someone with the same markers as both Daniel Nagle and Robert Pruett touched that report. There was not enough DNA markers to make a distinction between the two individuals. That marker is shared by approximately 30% of the white male population.
    This is important, as it tells the story of the last two people to touch that report. As a professional standard the results are considered inconclusive.
    Robert Pruett is exactly where he belongs (in prison) but NO ONE deserves the death penalty, least of all victims of homicide.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said!. While I agree with you about victims of homicide not deserving the death penalty, I find myself not being able to agree with the NO ONE part. Trust me, you have provided me with much to think about regarding my choice to support capital punishment, and I know you can't cherry pick who receives it and who doesn't - I just find certain cases hard to digest when I feel the perpetrators deserve to die for their actions.

      For instance, in the last couple of days I have been made aware of the case of 'Baby Grace'. This 2-year old's remains were washed up in a plastic box in Galveston Bay,TX where she remained unidentified for several weeks. Law enforcement, who had requested a forensic artist draw a picture of how the child would of looked, affectionately called her Baby Grace. It was the child's paternal grandmother who eventually saw the drawing and contacted the FBI believing Baby Grace was potentially her granddaughter Riley Ann. Little Riley Ann had disappeared to Texas with her mother shortly after her parent's relationship broke down. Her mother moved from Ohio to Texas to pursue a relationship with a man she met on World of Warcraft. To cut a long story short, this man had strict views on discipline and one day stayed home from work so he and the mother could 'break' the two year old. What followed was a day of horrific child abuse, the child was beaten with several belts, thrown across the room and held under water - because she wouldn't say 'yes, sir'. She died in her mother's arms. This mother not only did nothing to help her own child, she actively joined in the 'discipline' session - allegedly through fear she would lose her relationship. They stuffed the body in a plastic box and left it in the shed for six weeks before throwing her into the river. These poor excuses were sentenced to life without parole in 2009. Why should they be allowed to exist? have visits from family? get an education? I know prison is no pleasure trip but still, they get to breathe when they so easily snuffed out the life of a baby. It is in these cases I find it hard not to support the death penalty.

      I realise people will believe my view is nothing but vengeance - but I don't see it as that at all. Taking the life of a child, a mere baby, just seems worthy of the highest possible punishment. I am FAR from a violent person and maybe my view is an emotional one - I am a mother myself, my youngest is only a couple of years older than Riley.

      I do appreciate your comments, you are quite obviously knowledgeable and I am big enough to admit more than one of your comments has given me serious food for thought. I look forward to seeing more of your opinion.

      Delete
    2. Sorry Admin, I don't want you to feel that I am picking holes in your comments, However I think you may be mistaken, The heart doesn't stop due to a heart attack, the heart will actually continue to beat. I am not sure you are aware, however surrounding the heart are blood vessels, I cannot remember the name of them, however they supply the heart with high oxygen blood, when these blood vessels become blocked that is when the heart attack will occur.
      I think you may be confused with cardiac arrest which is where the heart completely stops. Also most heart attacks are caused by coronary heart disease. My opinion is that whether or not Daniel Nagel had any underlining heart problems, The state are sure enough that they want to execute Robert Pruett.
      However I do not believe that the evidence they have against Robert is enough. Although what I find quite interesting is the fact that Daniel Nagel served his country, He had done his job to ensure that people were kept safe from these inmates, I would have thought that someone would want justice for him, however I get the impression that from day 1 they have assumed Robert to be his murderer. I find this case quite fascinating really, and all of these comments. I don't believe that Robert is guilty.

      Delete
    3. The autopsy report reveals there were two small hemmhorraging wounds to the the neck, the rest of the wound showed no signs of hemmhorrage either internal or external, hence the heart attack, or cardiac arrest as cause of death.
      This is clearly depicted in crime scene photos where there is a small pool of blood, and descriptions in testimony from officers that the victim was found in a small pool of blood.
      If you are basing that as you feeling that Robert is not guilty the legal analysis would fail. It is a long held standard that the action that results in death is murder, so whether the victim had bleed to death, or the heart stopped beating would have little consequence legally.
      The evidence they have against Robert is very strong, however for those that believe the absence of DNA equals not guilty, I can only say the absence of DNA does not equal absence of evidence.
      Aside from the inmate testimony, there is physical evidence that leads to Robert including the bloody articles found in the bathroom adjacent to the attack, as well as the articles of clothing found in the area the inmates pointed to.
      There were no assumptions from Day 1 that they wanted to accuse Robert, and ot convict and execute.
      Let's look at the evidence in a light most favorable to Robert as opposed to what the law requires on appeal.
      When Robert was rounded up and placed in a room with all the other inmates from the corridor, Robert was observed to be bleeding from his hand. Not a lot of bleeding but enough to notice.
      From the investigators notes, Robert was then questioned how he cut his hand, to which he replied he cut it in the rec yard. Having no way to communicate with those in the rec yard he could not possible know that ALL the inmates interviewed while he was detained in the room, would state Robert was not observed by anyone on the rec yard.
      Both interviews were simultaneous as a result of the torn discipline report at Nagles body. Most of these inmates did not testify.
      During the process of the interviews it was discovered by investigators that Robert had offered to "give up" a weapon to other officers in exchange for dropping a prior disciplinary.
      Robert was also observed by inmates who refused to testify speaking to the victim shortly before the stabbing. This was stipulated to as Robert could not provide any inmates to substantiate he was not with the victim around the time of the stabbing.
      These two questions can now be answered in the affirmative,
      Was Robert at the scene? Yes
      Robert never denied that he attempted to "bribe" officers with a weapon, so did Robert have a weapon or access to a weapon? Yes.
      Could this have been a massive conspiracy on the part of Officers and inmates to frame Robert? In order to analyze that question you would have to first accept that the Investigators whom were there already investigating corruption within the prison were in on the conspiracy, and that just bends credulity. Robert was charged by the very officers from a separate entity that was already there investigating accusations of corruption and that branch did in fact arrest officer for various offenses months after the murder. It would only make sense that the corruption proceedings would have shed further light on the murder if that were the case.
      Finally, the peanut samich excuse. Much has been made recently that Robert says he wouldn't kill anyone over a peanut butter sandwich, Robert ignores the fact that it was not at all the states theory that he killed for a peanut butter sandwich, in fact the states theory was that he killed over a disciplinary report that would be the last one he could get before being removed to a different location,

      Delete
    4. The bloody articles of clothing that belonged to Pruett were NOT found adjacent to the murder scene. The bathroom in the multi-purpose room is not even close to being "adjacent" to the bathroom in the gymnasium. None of Pruett's clothing was found in the vicinity of the murder scene.

      Delete
    5. The DNA markers found on the disciplinary report were shared by approximately 30% of the McConnell Unit population and not just Nagle and Pruett. However, the palm print was NOT Pruett's.
      As for the blood, there was more than just a small pool. There were blood splatters on the wall, which would have happened as the murderer drew the shank back to stab Nagle again. Lisa Baylor testified to that at Pruett's trial. In her same testimony, she clarified that the bloody clothes that belonged to Pruett were not found in the bathroom located in the multi-purpose room where Nagle was murdered, but rather in the gymnasium where all inmates who were in the hallway waiting for chow, necessities, etc. were standing.

      Delete
  24. Wow. Touche. You can't say it any better than that.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Robert Pruett should not be executed. To many inconsistencies in the murder of Daniel Nagle. Robert is my friend - he is funny, smart, and loves life.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I have read everything I can find on Robert Lynn Pruett. All throughout his youth and his early incarceration it talks about him getting in trouble, fights, having disciplinary reports written up about him. Other than the lack of DNA or finger prints and the only eye witnesses being convicts - There are two huge red flags in his story that make me believe he is innocent. First - why after being written up for bringing a peanut butter sandwich into the common area would that anger him to the point of killing a prison guard? And second - Robert Pruett is very smart - if he planned this attack knowing he could get rid of this clothes in a gas shoot - why in the heck would he leave the torn disciplinary report next to the guards body? He was a young white kid locked up with majority Hispanics prisoners. Why would all those prisoners 'confess' ? Because they were part of a gang. Robert never stood a chance ....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Robert Pruett did not kill the guard just for a peanut butter sandwich and you and Robert like to state. The States theory is the peanut butter sandwich was the coup de gra, final straw. This disciplinary would have resulted in Robert being moved, he was facing another disciplinary that he was attempting to get nullified by way of helping CO's find a weapon. When the CO's didn't care that Robert could help them get a weapon, and Robert lost his final appeal of sentence all within a matter of days of the murder of Daniel Nagle, and the fact that the Nagle write up would move Robert, Robert lost it.

      You speak of the Robert today, not the Robert that was the 20 year old who killed and had two victims under his belt.

      I have spoken to the Robert of today, and no one would dispute he is a very charming man, however, he is many years matured from the date of the murder.

      You have obviously not read the record. There is plenty of evidence to convict Robert Pruett.

      Delete
  27. The prisons system in the U.S. is a multi billion dollar industry - hence it houses 25% of the World's prisoners. Slavery by name is still legal in the U.S. (Article 13, Section 2) for prisoners, and corporations make agreements that prisons should not fall below a certain capacity of inmates. The same folks lobby politicians to make it easier for people to be imprisoned. One of the biggest purchasers of slave - produced cotton from Death Row is Ikea. Ikea ... 'now that's NOT better' !!! The same cheeky bastards then drop a catalogue in my letterbox with a few pages dedicated to how 'Socially responsible' they are, complete with pics. of black folk. Fkd up World.

    ReplyDelete
  28. While alot of you have fantastic opinions and theories I have to tell you your very wrong. Yes robert is a very smart guy, did he do it? No. There is absolutely, no questions asked NO DNA evidence, not even a little bit against him. I am actually in contact with his attorneys on a regular basis and can tell you I have seen the legal documentation, that you cant find online. And I can absolutely assure you all he did not commit that crime. There is conflicting inmate testimony, which I have read, there is actual documentation from guards which also conflict. So while alot of you assume you knowwhat your talking about, weather you know him or not, its not true. Texas are rrenowned for convicting innocent men, which is what they have done here yet again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The absence of DNA does not equal the absence of evidence. There is plenty of evidence to convict Robert Pruett even today when the death penalty has become rare.
      Let's just talk about the physical evidence for a minute. When Nagle was discovered, the inmates in the area were brought to the gym, one of them was Robert. This is a quote from Roberts recently denied appeal
      "Other evidence was collected in the gymnasium and in the bathroom inside
      the gymnasium. A pair of pants and a white towel were found in the trashcan of
      the bathroom inside the gymnasium (XLII R.R. at 341 ). Another pair of pants was
      found in another trashcan outside the bathroom (XLII R.R. at 341 ). While blood
      on these items of clothing belonged to Pruett,"
      Robert claims he cut himself in the recreation yard, so why around the time of the murder in the gymnasium where they gathered the inmates in the area, why did Robert throw these items in trash cans?
      Then there is this from Pruett's original petition.
      " Pruett admitted that he
      had sent inmate Michael Ross a letter, through defense counsel’s investigator,
      just before trial, asking Ross to testify that he (Pruett) had cut his hand on the
      weights.
      In rebuttal, the prosecutor called Michael Hall and Michael Ross. Each
      of them testified that Pruett admitted to them that he had killed Nagle."
      Why did Robert ask an inmate to lie for him? Why does his appeal about the testimony of these two inmates object only that they were not listed as "rebuttal witnesses".?
      Of the inmates that were eyewitnesses there is no conflicting testimony, nor any conflicting statements given to investigators. In fact much of the conflicting testimony comes from those Robert confessed to.
      I am sure the rose colored glasses make Robert seem totally innocent to you, and that some grand conspiracy to convict a skinny kid who was frequently found by guards beaten and raped by inmates could never snap. But snap he did.

      Delete
    2. Could it possibly be that the reason Pruett threw those clothes out in the gymnasium was because it is near the necessities line where he would have gotten the new clothes?

      Delete
  29. Is it right for someone with such a black and white view of the world to accuse someone of wearing rose coloured glasses?

    Most of us have only seen published documents. The conflicting witness statements are key, everything else is conjecture, no matter how forcefully laid out in a hundred different ways.

    20 years ago, Robert looked more like a victim than an aggressor. In a dog eat dog world, the weakling of the pack is subjugated further, it doesn't turn round one day and attack a pack leader. There is no analysis on inmate to guard murder because the incidences are so small that the data is irrelevant. Unless by reason of insanity, it just doesn't happen.

    Robert Pruett is mentally capable.

    Suicide theory? Why kill a guard, why not kill a member of an Hispanic gang...that would be a sure fire way of being 'put out of your misery'.

    Death row is a long drawn out process. Robert was a clever kid? Perhaps he thought he would beat the system in due course. So why leave the most incriminating and inescapable evidence at the scene, i.e. The torn report and weapon?

    It is naive in the extreme to refuse to countenance for one minute that supposing a guard was murdered by, or with the involvement of, another guard, that there would not be an almighty cover up. Reality check, the criminal justice system is not made up of 100% honest people, but it is mainly made up of people who believe in the law and when signing up, effectively agree to go to any extent to uphold and protect it.

    20 years later the 'evidence' that gave investigators enough to go with, still convinces some people of Robert's guilt today. The question is, was it easier to rip TDCj apart back then, or let an unknown and abandoned kid take the blame. I believe his prior report was for gambling, which he did because he had no financial support from friends and family so that he had no support had been documented.

    Now for one thing I do know.. Robert was kept in a cell in December in nothing but his underwear with no food or water, for seven hours, while investigators were recorded leading him to admit to the crime.

    Still, Robert did not make a confession. At 22, alone and forgotten, with apparently a pile of evidence against him, how did the investigator not manage to extract a confession? Many give false confessions just to escape such barbaric treatment.

    Remember, this was supposed to be an attempt to get caught wasn't it? Did he have a sudden change of heart? There was his opportunity, but he maintains his innocence.
    Or he was 'hot' as the investigator was heard telling him to admit. Wouldn't that kind of treatment make him even angrier than the peanut butter sandwich incident?

    It Just Doesn't Add Up.

    Anyway, none of that investigation was used by the prosecution in the trial. Isn't that interesting?

    For me, the inconsistencies and conjecture do make for an unsafe conviction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have read the trial transcripts, and I can assure you it is not so hard to see why twelve people agreed to convict. What you see published does not nearly do the process justice.
      As for the weakling analogy, even a beaten dog can attack the owner when the animal has had enough and snaps.

      Delete
  30. If you believe what was written about Daniel Nagle, he was a firm but fair correctional officer. In the job he did, that was an act of dominance which is far more effective than physically beating inmates down.
    Even if Robert Pruett had the psychology of a beaten dog, Daniel Nagle would not have been the target of aggression. If he was an officer who was known to be violent or cruel towards prisoners then I would absolutely accept your analogy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The beaten down often snap at the last perceived danger. Nagle did write a disciplinary against Pruett that would move Pruett to yet another prison, yet another environment that he would have to prove himself. This was absolutely a serious threat to Pruett. It was a series of events starting with the night before according to testimony from trial.
      The night before, Pruett had attempted to bribe a guard into dropping a disciplinary for gambling by telling the guard he knew where a weapon was. The guard dismissed Pruett.
      The next morning with worn out shoes that Pruett had been vocal about, Pruett went to work outside in the fields. When he came in from work for lunch, Pruett was taken to get new shoes and Pruett missed hot lunch (according to testimony that was fried chicken) and was given a cold pb&j. While attempting to sneak the pb&j out into the yard where there was little time left to recreate, Pruett got caught, and caught by someone who would write a disciplinary. Testimony from trial was that Pruett first pleaded with Nagle not to write the disciplinary as it would mean he would be moved to an area "dangerous" to Pruett. Nagle wrote the disciplinary anyways informing Pruett that "there are rules", to with Pruett "flipped out and started cussing at Nagle".

      Pruett snapped. You would get a sense of that if you read the trial transcipt.

      Delete
    2. and yet that guard did nothing about Pruett supposedly having a shank. He didn't even write up his report about it until after Nagle had been murdered, so obviously he didn't consider Pruett to be much of a threat, did he?

      Delete
    3. Pruett never asked Michael Ross to lie. I have read the letter and nothing in it is asking him to lie.

      Delete
  31. On April 10, 2015 The CA5 AFFIRMED the lower Courts ruling that Robert Pruett be DENIED Habeas Corpus relief.

    ReplyDelete
  32. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  33. So unsiviliced and more typical for less developed nations to commit murder by state. This is 2015 and not 1861. There isn't even hard proof for conviction. Furthemore, 99 years imprisonment for a 15 year old is not a good medicine regardless. All changes must come from within, and society must react accordingly.

    ReplyDelete
  34. The DNA results are in and a partial FEMALE profile was found on the handle of the shank... hmmm, still think he is guilty?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes I do. The female DNA is not a surprise since in the Documentary you can see Pruetts female attorney handle the weapon. As was also pointed out at the hearing so did a female journalist.

      Delete
    2. As I have shared in past comments here I was in TDC in the 90S And can help clear up some these questions about what really happens in a Texas prison First no question in my mind he did it There is so many lies in his story As I am about to point out First question, Let's start with the clothes, Why did Robert throw these items in trash cans? This question was asked and another asked, Could it possibly be that the reason Pruett threw those clothes out in the gymnasium trashcan was because it is near the necessities line where he would have gotten the new clothes? The answer is NO First of all they only issue clean clothes at certain times 6 pm and after And certainly not right before time to feed Second in order to get clean clothes you MUST turn in dirty ones One for one No shirt turn in You don't get one Simple as that And when you don't have one to turn in you can get a write up, So why throw away clothes? All had do turn them in when time and told them cut self One other thing How come he didn't go to the infirmary if bleeding? All had do was show was bleeding would have been taken to infirmary immediately. Threw clothes away? Any inmate knows he is not telling truth about going to necessities. Now was asked about if tired of prison and the suicide theory Remember already tried several times kill his self, Why not kill a Hispanic Gang Member? Fair question Because he wouldn't be able too Never get that close Look it up Bet find any Hispanic Gang Member killed in TDC was by another rival Hispanic Gang Member or one his own Gang, You don't kill one them If do they kill 20 of yours And guess what You get the Death Penalty for killing another inmate in TDC now Not like back in 80s and 90s So that's a simple answer Yes understand probably realize take awhile Death Penalty All goes back to being a Coward He couldn't do his self Now let me clear up the PBJ theory First let me be clear Fried Chicken Day is a huge deal in Prison Same as Xmas day, Comes once a year Its a special lunch As he said he missed his coffee Hes miserable as it is Hs to go work in the fields And its exactly as it says Field work Worst work assignment in TDC Now comes in Boots need replaced Again not uncommon Fields turn in several need boots repaired or new ones It is an everyday thing So now he and others have to go get boots while others go to lunch Again happens everyday So takes awhile So now go to eat Every ones been fed and chow hall closed Again not uncommon happens everyday The kitchen makes whats called Johnnies a sack lunch Itleast 10 a day for this very case In case someone misses lunch, So that's what he gets And trust me it had a PBK a Bologna Sandwich and a Cookie and a Apple or Orange Believe me any inmate would have been pissed to miss chicken day Bet those others were too So now he is really aggravated Goes eat tries to sneak out with sandwich Wrong Guard catches him UH OH Now cause of the write up he got for gambling and now this one And it is a write up Reason cant take food outside Or out in common areas? They say to control roaches and such But it is a rule, Most Guards make thow away But knew guards like Nagle Did it by book And you took youre chance if crossed one like that Don't wanna get caught Don't do in front of one you know is a stickler, So now going to get moved to another building Let me make this clear that is a HUGE deal. He was going to be moved now to what is a disciplinary building Where everyone is what they call a LINE 3 Everyone there has done something in prison over and over to be in that building So imagine the inmates there Trust me not a place want be So that's why he flipped out Call what want But he just lost it after all this that happened Trust me people have been killed for a lot less in Prison including guards. I hope this helps

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete