Texas Justice
Governor Greg Abbott may be about to cross one of the most grotesque rubicons imaginable
Texas Governor Greg Abbott has claimed he will pardon Daniel Perry (an Army sergeant at Fort Hood) for the murder of Black Lives Matter protestor Garrett Foster (an Air Force veteran) as soon as it hits his desk.
This is abhorrent to the rule of law, as he has yet to go through the appeals process—which he has every right to do—and it ignores the fact that a jury of this man’s peers heard the evidence (far more evidence than Greg has seen) and determined, unanimously, that he was guilty.
It’s reminiscent of a scene from Mississippi Burning where a violent group of klansmen are tried locally, convicted, and sentenced to a lengthy prison sentence. But just before the Judge ends the proceeding, he explains to the courtroom how outside agitators have come in and set things ablaze, how they made these men do what they did, and that he hereby suspends each sentence. Amid the hoots and hollers and blackslapping, a stone-faced black audience segregated to the balcony stares onward blankly as if this is just another example of southern justice they’ve seen their entire lives.
Southern Justice
I was born in Texas, and I’ve lived here all my life—in Houston, in Austin, in remote rural regions of East Texas, in South Texas. And I’ve never seen this before. Such a blatant disregard for decency and respect that we try our best to provide to victims and their families.
A jury found a man guilty of murder, and for whatever reason—whether it was Tucker Carlson demanding a pardon on his evening show, right-wing Twitter outrage, or what—our Governor has decided HE is the only jury that matters when it comes to meting out justice in a case where he didn’t sit through the evidence.
The ghost of Judge Roy Bean [to whom I’m actually related] is alive and well.
So let’s dive into some of the reporting about this case.
”Two months into those protests, on Saturday, July 25, 2020, Perry, a sergeant stationed at Fort Hood and working as a rideshare driver in Austin, accelerated his car into a crowd of protesters at the corner of Fourth Street and Congress Avenue. Garrett Foster, a 28-year-old Air Force veteran openly carrying an AK-47 across his chest, approached the car. The driver's side window opened and Perry shot Foster four times in the chest and abdomen.”
- Austin Chronicle
Accounts are divided on some of the details, such as whether he sped up or slowed down as he approached the crowd just prior to the confrontation, or if Foster raised his rifle to Perry.
On the 3rd day of testimony, some of Perry’s communications were revealed. One text on June 2020 to a friend read “I might have to kill a few people on my way to work, they are rioting outside my apartment complex.” “I might go to Dallas to shoot looters” in another. Those texts alone don’t make him a murderer.
But he did reportedly discuss with a friend on how to actually get away with murdering a protestor:
Prosecutors presented a Facebook Messenger chat between Perry and a friend, Michael Holcomb, which occurred two weeks before he shot Foster. In it, Perry argued that shooting protesters was legal if it was in self-defense. Holcomb, who was called to the stand Wednesday afternoon, seemed to try to talk Perry down. "Aren't you a CDL holder too?" he asked, referring to the men's licenses to carry concealed handguns. "We went through the same training ... Shooting after creating an event where you have to shoot, is not a good shoot."
- Austin Chronicle
Texas law does not allow one to argue self-defense in a “stand your ground” case if that person provoked the threat. Yet, here, Perry reportedly argued self-defense. So who provoked the threat?
On his 911 call, he reportedly admits that he made a wrong turn and mistakingly drove into the crowd. According to law enforcement, he stopped to wait for the crowd initially. Then honked. Then pushed forward through the crowd. According to multiple accounts in the crowd, he sped through and physically bumped some of the protestors. Already, it seems confusing to the reader. Did he stop and wait as the police say, or did he, as stated in his call, accidently drive into the crowd? And if it was an accident, how is the crowd supposed to know it wasn’t intentional? How is Garrett Foster supposed to know? If he has a rifle, and he is legally carrying, is there a legal definition for how one should approach a car without getting shot? [We’re now getting into the abject absurdities of open carry, but that’s for another post.] The crowd responded by slapping and kicking the car. Foster was reportedly seen approaching the window on the driver’s side with a legally-carried AR-15 (not loaded). But did Foster raise his rifle? The defense claims yes, but multiple witnesses testified no. And what is raising? 2 inches? 5 inches? Does Perry get to legally decide that question and take an actual life? And did the mere fact that he drove into the crowd prior to that moment negate his “stand your ground” claim of self-defense?
The jury of 12 peers heard all of this. They heard from the prosecution, they heard from the defense. They watched 3D-rendered reenactments and heard multiple eyewitness testimony.
And they concluded that Daniel Perry murdered Garrett Foster.
Texas Justice?
And so here we are, potentially living in a society where right and wrong and decency completely break down, where taking a life is seemingly acceptable dependant upon the political views of the victim, where the state can inflict incredible emotional damage on a victim’s family for political purposes, where a cable talk show host decides guilt or innocence, where the sanctity of trial-by-jury gets mutilated, where the appeals process isn’t even allowed to play itself out, and where, like in Mississippi Burning, terrible, awful deeds can be committed and judgement negated.
Pardon him if you want, Greg. You have that power. But Perry has a path to appeal. He should be allowed to appeal. He should try to have his conviction overturned the right way by presenting the very same evidence that you think is so obvious to another court, and then it can decide. Only once that process has reached it’s conclusion should you intervene (if at all).
But there is no appeal for Garrett Foster. He is gone. If you pardon Perry, you convict him. And to jump in haphazardly with this power simply to appease Tucker Carlson and Twitter Right is to inflict the most catastrophic emotional torture on Foster’s parents and his fiancee that you possibly could. And I have to think there’s still some semblance of that Supreme Court justice hiding in you somewhere.
Garrett was a citizen. A military veteran. Exercising a right he enlisted to protect. His life wasn’t less valuable simply because he was protesting a cause you dislike.
Do the right thing for his family and let the appeals process play out.
