When Ramiro Gonzales was sentenced to death in 2006 for the rape and murder of a young woman in Texas, it followed the testimony of a psychiatrist who suggested that Mr. Gonzales could very well commit a similar crime in the future if he remained alive.
But nearly two decades later, the psychiatrist, Dr. Edward Gripon, no longer stands by what he told the jury.
In a subsequent report, he wrote that he had testified about a statistic that showed a high likelihood that those who commit sexual assaults will reoffend; the statistic turned out to be unfounded, he said, and after meeting with Mr. Gonzales a few years ago, he no longer believed he posed a threat.
The jury that heard Dr. Gripon’s initial testimony concluded that Mr. Gonzales should be sentenced to death, and despite desperate efforts by defense lawyers to highlight the psychiatrist’s new reservations, Mr. Gonzales was scheduled to be executed Wednesday evening by lethal injection.
The case has highlighted the unusual importance that Texas places on the contentious practice of predicting whether a person convicted of a capital crime is likely to be violent again.
Persons:
Ramiro Gonzales, Gonzales, Edward Gripon, Gripon’s
Locations:
Texas