Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 600 | Debate: Is Death Row Inmate Melissa Lucio Innocent? | Guest: Rep. Jeff Leach

Episode Date: April 14, 2022

Today we're talking with Texas state Representative Jeff Leach about the potential fate and innocence of Melissa Lucio, who is on death row after being convicted of killing her young daughter in 2007. Since then, a movement has sprung up around her, attracting criminal justice reform advocates from both Left and Right to rally to her cause. Many of these supporters claim that Lucio not only is innocent, but she was a wonderful mom and person who is just a victim of the system. Rep. Leach at the very least believes there should be a retrial for Lucio, as he says important evidence was left out of the original trial. We debate the differing sources of information and evidence and whether or not it should result in another trial. While neither of us would ever want an innocent person to be executed, there are serious questions about whether Lucio truly is innocent here, and we hash out our difference of opinion with Rep. Leach. --- Today's Sponsors: Cozy Earth has the softest, most luxurious, environmentally friendly, and ethically-produced bedding today. Save 35% off your order CozyEarth.com/ALLIE when you use promo code 'ALLIE'! Good Ranchers — change the way you shop for meat today by visiting GoodRanchers.com/ALLIE to support local, American farms & lock in your best price. Use promo code 'ALLIE' to save $30 off your order! Carly Jean Los Angeles provides clothes that are effortless, easy, & flattering on any shape, size, age, or season. Save 20% off your first order of anything in their online store. Go to CarlyJeanLosAngeles.com & use promo code 'ALLIEB'. --- Previously Mentioned Episodes: Ep 532: The Case Against Julius Jones | Guest: Sean Fitzgerald https://apple.co/3KM2Tjh Ep 426: Should Christians Support the Death Penalty? https://apple.co/37lcn6z --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Hey, guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Thursday. This episode is brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers American Meat delivered right to your front door. Go to Good Ranchers.com slash alley. That's good ranchers.com slash alley. All right, guys, today I've got a fiery episode for you. A heated, extremely. but a respectful exchange between me and a Republican state legislator. His name is Representative Jeff Leach. And we are talking about the case of Melissa Lucio. She is a Texas woman

who is on death row. She was convicted in 2008 of murdering her two-year-old daughter Mariah. Representative Jeff Leach, 82 other state representatives who are both Republican and Democrat, including the Innocence Project, Kim Kardashian, a Hulu documentary are all saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, we think this woman is innocent. We don't think that she had a fair trial. We need to at least place a pause on her execution. She is set to be executed in 13 days. Here's why we're having this discussion. Representative Leach believes her to be innocent.

He at least believes that she didn't have a fair trial. I believe that the evidence is stacked against her. Really, my biggest contention isn't whether or not she should be executed in 13 days. Maybe there should be a pause. Maybe you do have some contention about how the case went. I believe that everyone should have a fair trial. I believe that everyone has a right to not just a defense, but also a good legitimate defense. That's fine.

What I contend with here, and you'll hear this in the conversation that we are going to have that I just recorded, is this assertion that she is innocent completely, that she's, She, there is no evidence of physical abuse of her child, that she was just this loving, wonderful mother and that this crime actually never happened, that it was just a tragedy. And that is what the Innocence Project is saying. She says that, or the Innocence Project says that this was a tragedy, that it was not a crime, and that the judge excluded expert testimony on the effects of trauma, which deprived Melissa of a defraved. but as the appellate court later said, that's actually not true.

That's not true that the expert testimony that would have had any bearing whatsoever on Melissa's defense was excluded. So there have been two opportunities to appeal, two efforts to appeal this case. And the appellate courts have upheld the decision and said, no, we actually think this trial was legitimate and that the sentence was just. However, the Innocence Project says, this never happened. This was a result. The entire trial was a result of a series of injustices, failures of the criminal legal system, and generational trauma. The state of Texas, the Innocence Project says, presented no physical evidence that established Melissa had ever abused Mariah or any of her children, as you will hear me say in this interview that is absolutely false. Vanessa Potkin of the Innocence Project says that the conviction rests on false and erroneous medical evidence and that there's important new scientists. evidence. And Potkin also told USA today that there were no visible signs of injury at the time that Mariah was found by the paramedics. That is a blatant lie based on not just what the defense

attorney, her defense attorney admitted to in court that she was a negligent mother, that she was an abusive mother. She confessed to these things. On tape, she confessed to abusing her daughter, to hitting her daughter, to smacking her daughter. She said that she pinched. her daughter's vagina. She said that she bit her daughter twice on the back. She admitted to these things. The defense attorney owns up to the fact that she admitted to these things. Also, she has a long history with CPS going back to the mid-1990s. She has several children, I think 14 children at this point. And from the mid-90s onwards, she had been found that she had been negligent toward her children, that she had abused her children in 2004. This, of course, is when Mariah was a baby before

she was, I believe, murdered in 2007. The CPS worker at the time, she records in an affidavit that all of her children were neglected, that it was an insect-infested place. We're not just talking about people living in poverty. We're talking about little children running around without any diapers, without any underwear on, apparently had dried feces all over them. There were ants crawling all over the baby. I mean, this is Melissa Lucio.

This is who we're talking about. And so, again, maybe you think that she is not guilty. Maybe you think that she is not guilty of murder. But to say, as the Innocence Project is, as the state representative seem to be saying, as the Clemency petition is saying that she is completely innocent, that there has been no troubling history, no important context that we need to consider when it comes to deciding whether or not this person is guilty, that is a blatant lie. That is my problem with all of this, that it seems like a lot of propaganda,

and that we're not owning up to the fact that she actually does have a very troubling history of violence and abuse and neglect. Not to mention the fact that multiple times when CPS visited her, she tested positive for cocaine use, but also her children tested positive for cocaine use. Now, none of those things make her guilty of the crime that she is said to have committed in 2007. But I do think it's important context. So that is what we are going to be debating today. We are going to be debating, yes, the facts of the case, but also how did the procedure go down? Why does it seem like these organizations are paying her as this loving mother when it doesn't seem like the evidence proves that? At the end of the day, though, and this is why this is why this conversation is going to end well.

It might be intends at times. Maybe you feel yourself kind of tinsing up because I believe, at least when it comes to representative leach, I can't speak for the Innocence Project. You guys know I did a whole podcast on Julius Jones and how they lied about that case. We can link it in the description of this episode. I actually think that they are extremely deceitful as an organization, unfortunately. But when it comes to Representative Leach, whose heart I trust and whose motivations I believe are pure. We both want justice. We want justice. We want God's definition of what justice looks like.

I think we both believe in the truth. And that's why it's so important. and I think for us to hash this out, for us to talk about this. And so, yes, we do kind of disagree, but you'll see in this conversation, like, I learned some things. And he certainly challenged me effectively. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself.

On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular.

This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed,

you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Representative, thank you so much for joining us in studio. For those who don't know,

can you tell us who you are and what you do? Sure, Allie, it's great to be with you. And my name's State Representative Jeff Leach. I'm in my fifth term serving in the Texas House, part of Collin County, just north of Dallas and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and Chairman of the House Criminal Justice Reform Committee as well. And so I'm very proud to serve 200,000 constituents, just north of Dallas and Collin County and strong conservative record. And we've got a lot of important work ahead of us to keep Texas strong and free. Yes, I think some people may be surprised to find a conservative representative. Popple King, kind of on the front lines of a story that is in the news right now, and that is about a woman on death row in Texas, Melissa Lucio. And you have fought really hard against her death sentence because from what you've said, you believe her to be innocent and you believe the system has failed her. So can you talk about, before we get into the ins and out of the case,

can you talk about how you got involved in this particular case? Well, I think it's important for for all Americans, all Texans, but really for conservatives who care about life and liberty and the rule of law and public safety to care deeply about criminal justice reform. So yes, this issue and issues relating to the death penalty and the way we, no pun intended, execute the death penalty in Texas are important, but so are all of these other great criminal justice issues that conservatives, in my opinion, should be leading on. We saw that in the Trump administration with the Second Chance Act and with getting people back in their homes and out of prisons who are no threat to society who've paid their debt and back to being productive taxpaying citizens. So that's what you mean when you're talking about criminal justice reform because that's a wide umbrella that could also include some really disastrous policy like bail reform like we've seen in Houston that has been totally disastrous.

Right. So when you're talking about criminal justice reform, specifically what are you referring to? So I want a policy in Texas that is tough on crime but smart on crime. We've gotten really good in this country and in this state for locking people up that we're just mad at instead of those people that we're scared of. Now, when there are crimes that are committed, when people are harmed, when there's property crimes, when people commit a crime and are convicted by a jury of their peers, they have to pay their consequences, no doubt about it. And we need a system that protects that framework. But at the end of the day, if someone, if there's a dad in prison that is, no threat to society that's paid his debt, that's made his victim whole, that can get back home with his kids who are being raised in fatherless homes, who could be a productive tax-paying citizen, who can just be part of society. If we can do that, we should do that. And we've seen Republicans and Democrats, conservatives, and liberals come together on those issues, Allie. Of course, there's a lot of issues on which we disagree. You know, some of the efforts

to legalize drugs across the nation. I'm firmly against those efforts and others that we could talk about. But I think just conservatives should be leading on this. It's about freedom and liberty and life and the rule of law and making sure our streets and our schools and our communities are safe. And so that's why I care about it. I've cared about it for a long time. And I think Republicans have a unique opportunity to lead on this issue. I think it's difficult because from the conservative perspective and maybe just from the perspective of the average person, we're seeing crime rates go up and the recidivism rate is so high. And so often when we see these violent criminals that commit these heinous crimes, well, they've been arrested several times or they had a progressive judge or a progressive

DA not really do their jobs in the name of criminal justice, in the name of bail reform or whatever it is. I know that's not what you're talking about, but I think that it can be a difficult issue for conservatives because, yes, of course we believe in liberty. I don't want anyone doing time past what they should. I want them to pay their consequences and like you said, be redeemed and restored back into society. But it's a little bit hard for me to balance when, as a Every single crime that we see in the news, it's like, wow, the system failed the victim, not the criminal in that, in that particular case, in the name of social justice or equity, that person was let it back out on the streets. They never should have been. Yeah, and I'm not interested in those efforts and, in fact, have worked strongly against those efforts. So if you look at some of the things that I've led on in the criminal justice reform area in the Texas House, it's protecting victims of sexual assault, of child abuse, and neglect, making sure that our laws are strong. to hold those responsible human trafficking.

I mean, we have escalated penalties. We have created new crimes. Our penal code has grown. It has not shrunk. And so we need to make sure that people who are a danger to their families, to their kids, to anyone in society, that they're off the streets. That they can't get out of prison early. What's happened in Harris County with bail reform is a colossal disaster. And we've worked hard in Austin to correct that and address it.

And to hold local prosecutors accountable. because we want to make sure public safety is paramount, supporting law enforcement is paramount, and we want to lock up the bad guys. There's no question about it. A lot of people who need to be in prison and never need to be let out. But at the same time, at the same time, we conservatives who believe, we believe in second chances, not for everybody, but people who deserve a second chance and have proven they've deserved a second chance where there are no threat at all and their victims are made whole. I think that we ought to not be afraid of the conversation as to how we can restore them, not only for their own good, but for the benefit of society and for their own families.

And I just have not been afraid to have those conversations. And Melissa Lucio, in your opinion, is she someone that deserves a second chance? So I actually have not opined on whether Melissa Lucio is innocent or guilty. I have not. You won't find any public statement from me that says that she's innocent. I do believe that the facts, that she deserves a new tribe, I do believe that there is a multitude, a mountain of exculpatory evidence that was not heard in the initial trial that needs to be held. Spent time with Melissa. I've spent hours and hours, days and days reviewing her case.

I believe strongly that the system failed her, Allie, at every single turn and failed not only her, but Mariah, who is the victim, her daughter, who's the victim of this terrible tragedy. But I am not the fact finder. I'm a policymaker. I'm a legislator. I am not the judge or the jury or the prosecutor. her. But I reviewed what happened in her case and in her trial and believe so strongly that the system failed her. And here we are just several days, 13 days away from her scheduled execution date. And let's not mince words. The state is getting ready to murder someone who is potentially

innocent. And I believe very strongly that she deserves a new trial. Okay. So you did say that you have never seen a case more troubling than that of Melissa Lucio, Rep. Jeff Leach said, we got to use that voice to save an innocent person. So do you believe? To save a potential, I don't know what statement you're reading, to save a potentially innocent person. That's been the vast majority of my statements have not opined on her innocence or guilt.

Now, if- Now, you did tweet that you believe that this is a crime that wasn't committed, that it wasn't a murder. That's also what the Innocence Project is saying. Well, there's evidence that shows that it was not. There's evidence that was never admitted into trial people who actually saw what happened, that she fell down the stairs, that she was not pushed.

There's even evidence out there that Melissa was not even there at the time. None of this made it into the initial trial, none of it. And there's the interrogation, the tactics that were used, the coercion is extremely troubling. Her lack of adequate defense counsel. Look, every Texan deserves a fair trial. Every Texan deserves a fair trial. They have. have that constitutional right to a fair trial of their peers in front of a jury of their peers. And I do not believe that Melissa Lucio got that, that that was afforded to her. In fact, I think the system failed her multiple times all throughout the process. So even it was appealed twice, 2011, they rejected the appeal.

On procedural grounds. And then in 2021, they also upheld the sentence. And in 2016, they also went through every single argument that the defense was making, that the appellant was making. and they, the appellant gave the arguments that you are giving that, look, they excluded some evidence. They excluded the witnesses that we wanted to. And the court went through every single one of those arguments and explained why. No, it actually was a legitimate process. So you think the system failed, not just in trial court, but also we're talking about in the Fifth Circuit of Appeals as well. You believe that the whole process was wrong, corrupt or what? Yes, I do. Okay. I do. And I believe, uh, that the facts overwhelmingly show that. Our federal courts, the Fifth Circuit, federal law needs to be changed. It is very hard, very hard to overturn a conviction based on any singular piece of new evidence,

even a collaboration of new evidence like in Melissa's case. Her appeals were denied essentially on procedural grounds. I agree with the Reagan appointee on the Fifth Circuit, Judge Higginbotham, who is one of the strongest conservative justices we have anywhere in this country, who said that the system absolutely failed, Melissa, that this is a miscarriage of justice. I think those were her, his words, but their hands were tied procedurally. And so all I'm asking for, I am not opining on her innocence or guilt. All I'm asking for is for us to push the pause button before she's executed and for us to work hard to get her a new trial. And the vast majority of death penalty supporters and opponents, Allie agree with that.

We've gotten over 90 state representatives, conservatives and liberals, death penalty opponents and supporters who've asked for a new trial for her, who've asked for the pause button today, 20 state senators and, including the most Republican state senators and the most liberal said, look, let's just push the pause button here to make sure that we don't move forward with this irreversible stain on the Lone Star State, and that's executing someone who could be potentially innocent. So the letter that you signed, as well as you're included in these 83 members of the Texas House of Representatives and the clemency petition that you had sent me. So in the letter, it said Mariah died after a tragic accident rather than an intentional capital murder, Miss Lucio, who had no documented history of violence towards her children.

And the clemency petition says by all accounts, Melissa was a loving mother who never abused her children as the children themselves told the police. So it actually does sound like you are opining on whether or not she's innocent. The statements that you have made, at least to infer that. And the letter that you signed, it says that she died after a tragic accident rather than intentional capital murder. So it sounds like you think that she is innocent. Oh, I definitely think she's innocent, but I'm not based on what I know. But it's not my job to declare her innocent. Let me make that clarification.

I am not the judge or jury. I cannot declare her, nor can the Board of Pardons and Paroleals or governor. They could grant clemency or commutation or a stay. But what we're asking for, this is about the process more than it is necessarily her conviction. I believe the process in the system has failed her and she deserves a new trial. If I was on the jury, knowing what I know right now, absolutely I would vote for her innocence. And there are five jurors, five of the original jurors, including the jury four person, who felt like they were misled by the prosecution, that the process failed, Melissa. regret not only convicting her, but sentencing her to death. They've said basically they've

affirmed publicly, Allie, that if they knew then what they knew now, there's no way they would have voted the way they did. And so I'm joining the vast majority of folks that I'm talking to conservatives and liberals, death penalty opponents and supporters, like I've said, who said, yeah, there's a lot of evidence that needs to be heard that that would lend support to the fact that she's innocent. And I am definitely open to hearing that evidence and those arguments. What I have a really hard time with is what the letter from the state representative, with the clemency petition, and then what the Innocence Project is saying, that there was no evidence of abuse that she seems to be, she seems to be innocent while seeming to exclude a lot of evidence. And I just want to read,

just so people see, this is the transcript of the opinion of the judges when the case was first appealed and heard in 2011. So one of the paramedics, Mr. Nestor, testified that when the paramedic, entered, and I'll definitely give you a chance to respond to all of this, entered their apartment. They found Mariah unattended and lying on her back in the middle of the floor, not breathing in with no pulse. Nestor observed that the appellant's, this is Lucio, distant and not overly distressed behavior, was so far out of the ordinary that he put it into the report. He also testified that he noted the fact that the appellant was not even within arm's reach of the child, much less trying to grasp or to hold her. There were bruises in various stages of healing covering her

body. There were bite marks on her back. One of her arms had been broken probably two to seven weeks before her death. She was missing portions of her hair where it had been pulled out by the roots. The emergency room physician, Dr. Vargas, testified that this was the absolute worst case of child abuse that he had seen in his 30 years of practice. He also testified that his emergency room visual and manual inspection of Mariah indicated that there may or may not have been a head injury. But then the chief forensic pathologist for a case. Cameron and Hidalgo counties, Dr. Farley, who conducted the autopsy, testified that Mariah's case of death was blunt force head trauma, that she had multiple contusions to her head area,

and that blunt force head trauma basically means beat about the head with something in object, a fist, or slammed. Appellant's recorded statement reflects that she told the police officers, Texas Ranger Escalon, that she and only she had been spanking or hitting Mariah since sometime after December 2006. She said that she hit or spanked her, that she beat her when she got angry. And then she told a story about how her other children were jumping around. She got frustrated. She put her hand over Mariah's mouth. She bit her on the back and dragged her teeth down her back. She testified, recorded that she pinched her daughter's vagina and that she would sometimes hit her daughter or squeeze her arm for no reason. But the defense says,

the defense, her defense attorney says, yes, she admitted to beating her daughter. Yes, she admitted to biting her daughter. Yes, she admitted to not being a good mother. Yes, she admitted to neglecting her mother. But the defense simply said, all I'm saying was that she didn't cause her daughter's death. Now, that is very different than saying what the innocence project and what this letter and the clemency petitions is saying that she was a wonderful mother. So what do I do with all of that information. Well, all of that has been contradicted by contradictory medical, scientific evidence, exculpatory evidence.

She admitted it on tape. So, again, let's talk about the process, okay? They zoomed in within two hours of Mariah's death. They zoomed in, they zoned in on Melissa as the only suspect, okay? Within two hours, she was being interrogated by armed guard. She had a history of being abused as a child and being sexually abused and a victim of domestic violence herself. She was especially susceptible to these coercive interrogation tactics, which today in most states, including Texas, are outlawed. Okay, I've seen the video, I've watched

the video. You had armed law enforcement standing over her for five hours. She was pregnant with twins at the time, Allie, deprived of food and water. Over 100 times she denied having anything to do with her daughter's death. Over 100 times in five hours. They continued on. They coerced her. They said, come on, you know, it's the most shocking interrogation video I've ever seen. And when she said, fine, what do you want me to say? I did it. That's what they hung the entire prosecution on. So all of the evidence that you just talked about, all of the medical exams, the pathology reports, the Dr. Farley, who works for the prosecutor's office in Cameron County, all of that was hinged on their initial indictment of Ms. Lucia, Melissa Lucia being the only suspect. It was all hinged on that one statement she made. What do you want me to say?

I did it after a five-hour interrogation. All of that has been refuted by the defense's medical and its own pathology reports, its own testimony. We have multiple affidavits from family members and from other folks who said that, yeah, she wasn't a perfect mother, but she wasn't violent towards Mariah. None of her kids had ever seen her. Why would her defense attorney? She had a terrible defense attorney. I mean, he had a terrible defense attorney. What do you want to say?

He's terrible. in my opinion he should be disbarred. He absolutely should be disbarred. I've read all the transcripts. He's awful. She was deprived. It happens a lot in death penalty cases where folks who cannot afford counsel or appointed counsel within days of her conviction and her sentence to death penalty. Her defense attorney went to work for the Cameron County prosecutor who prosecuted the case and who's now serving 13 years in federal prison for corruption and bribery. But all of the evidence, a lot of the evidence was just left out of the trial. It was just left out. The jury never heard it. Like what evidence? Contradictory medical evidence. Like what? Pathology reports that say, like for instance, the bite marks were completely refuted. There were no bite marks.

None. No bite marks. None. So we think that the paramedics and the person who conducted the autopsy and the emergency room physician that they were all lying. I think that they, I don't want to say that they were lying. I think that they misled the jury. It happens a lot where they're going to offer their opinions. but defense is entitled to in a fair trial offer their contradictory opinions as well.

So the bite marks were a lie. The fact that her kidneys were bruised was a lie. Her kidneys were not bruised. She had a severe blood disorder. She had a, again, when evidence is presented in a jury in a criminal case like this, you present your evidence and there's an ability for cross-examination. So the other side gets to poke holes in your testimony. Then I get to present my testimony, my evidence, and the prosecution gets to poke

in that. And then the jury takes all of that information and makes an informed decision as to what they think actually happened. And that did not happen in this case. And that fact alone, I believe, is evidence and would support our push for a new trial for Melissa. The five jurors have said that. They've reviewed all of the evidence now. And they've said, well, we didn't hear any of this. We weren't afforded the opportunity to hear any of this. And so even the new DA alley in Cameron County, we had a hearing the other day. He appeared in front of our committee. Even the new DA has said that, you know what, you're right. You're right. And if the court of criminal appeals or the governor and the Board of Partons and Pearls don't step in to stay this execution,

then the new Cameron County District Attorney Louise Signs has said that he will step in. So the appellate court, I know that she said it was dismissed on procedural grounds, but they really go through all of the arguments and all of the evidence. They don't say, okay, well, on this technicality, we're just going to reject it. I mean, they really believe that she is guilty and that the trial was conducting. in a way that is legitimate. So what you're saying, again, that it's not just the trial court that got it wrong. It's not just those witnesses that were misleading the jury, but also that the appellate courts got it wrong as well. Well, remember, there was a panel on the Fifth Circuit

appellate court that actually agreed with Melissa's attorneys. In 2019. And then it was overturned by the full Fifth Circuit on procedural grounds. And they, well, they explain why they got that, why they believe that the partial panel decided an error. But they did not, appellate courts do not review evidence like a jury does. They don't review evidence like a trial court does. They have completely different standards. There's different burdens that they have to be met. And they were unable to, on procedural grounds, grant the appeal. But what they were trying to decide was, were the witnesses because there were two witnesses that the defense says, okay, we weren't allowed to bring these witnesses forward. And that's part of

the evidence, the evidence that they would say would have helped our case. And so the appellate court is deciding, okay, is that legit or not? Is that a good contention? The appellate court decided, no, it's not. And they give their reasons why those two witnesses should have been and were legitimately excluded and that that's not actually grounds for an appeal. And so, yes, they don't look at the evidence directly, but they look at whether or not the trial was conducted well or, you know, in a way that is right, legitimate, valid. And so obviously, I guess you disagree. with that decision. It's not about whether or not they were able to review evidence, but they think that the evidence that was included, I guess, was sufficient. And that it was, she was afforded due process.

Yeah. So on the habeas corpus petition, I mean, we could get into the details and I'm happy to do so, but there are a number of justices on the Fifth Circuit who just strongly disagreed with the entire panel. It was not a resoundingly unanimous decision of the Fifth Circuit. I believe that federal law needs to be changed to allow more of these, more review of cases just like this all across the country. Absolutely, I do. I think they got it wrong. And the good news is that we have the Board of Partons and Paroles. We have the Court of Criminal Appeals. And we've got now the local DA in Cameron County who all disagree with the Fifth Circuit's decision. The Board of Partners' Peralds hasn't ruled yet, nor has the Court of Criminal Appeals, but the DA has. And so all we're asking for here is to push the

pause button. And I've watched you enough, and I know you, you have, you have. enough and your viewers enough to know your audience that we conservatives are naturally distrustful of government. We should be. I mean, right now with what's happening in Washington, with the White House, the executive branch, the legislative branch, I don't trust the Biden White House. I don't trust Fauci. I don't trust Nancy Pelosi. And I don't trust the progressive, radical prosecutor in Cameron County who's now behind bars. I don't trust them. And I think they got it wrong. And I think Melissa is the victim and ultimately justice is prevented from Mariah. And all I'm asking for is the pause button to allow a new trial. And I don't understand when I hear folks like who support the death penalty

at all costs and say that, yeah, this is a God ordained institution and this is something conservatives have always supported. And I hear all the arguments for the death penalty. And I'm a supporter of the death penalty in the most heinous cases. But at the end of the day, a God ordained institution can be messed up by sinful man. And we have an obligation, I would say a strong obligation and a duty to do everything we can to correct that and to correct those injustices and to speak up for people who can't speak for themselves and to make sure that potentially innocent Texan isn't put to death by the state with your tax dollars and my tax dollars on our watch. I definitely agree with you that I don't want a potentially innocent person to die. And I am

pro death penalty in cases of capital murder because I do think that, I mean, Genesis 9-6 explains exactly why God demands the death penalty for those cases because we are made in the image of God. Usually based on, but there's other scripture that says it has to be based on two or three eyewitnesses. Yes. But we can have that conversation another time. Yes. There were no eyewitnesses, no eyewitnesses of this crime. I agree. I agree with you. I agree with you that the death penalty is legitimate in some cases and not necessarily all cases.

course we believe in due process and we absolutely should. One of my issues with all of this is that those who are making a defense of her seem to be leaving out really important evidence like the Innocence Project who is saying that she was just a wonderful mother, that there were no signs of abuse. There were no signs of physical abuse of Mariah. Even if you think that the emergency room physician and the paramedic that they were all misleading the jury. I mean, you would have, it would almost be like a conspiracy theory to believe that all of those people were lying. And not only that, you would have to believe, which, you know, I don't trust CPS all that much, but I think that we should take this into consideration. There was an affidavit in 2004. This is by

CPS caseworker De La Garza. She said that she made several trips to Lucio's home throughout the 90s in the early 2000s, she was typically found guilty of neglect of her children. And then this particular case, which was one of many cases in which CPS had to take her children and make sure that her children were physically okay. She wrote this, that Robert four years old when she visited Lucio in her home, was observed with a dime-sized bruise on his stomach and old scratch on his stomach, insect bites on his arms and legs. She said that the entire home was infested with aunts, including where the baby Mariah was sleeping. We don't put people to death for these things.

We don't put bad mothers to death. No, but this dies, this is relevant because when you hear the Innocence Project and when you hear other people, wow, there's no, she's just this innocent woman. I'm not saying that. Well, you have said that. But she's just this innocent woman in the Innocence Project saying that there was no sign of abuse. You read this affidavit by the CPS.

look, I mean, not only was she at least neglecting her children, if not outright abusing her children, she and her children also tested positive for cocaine. I mean, this was a problem throughout drug use. I agree with you. I'm not saying that this is what justifies her execution. I am saying there's plenty of context and plenty of history, plenty of criminal history with her to tell us that it's probably pretty likely that she was abusing Mariah. She admitted to abuse. Mariah in a variety of ways on record and that I don't think that it's fair or right to say that she is probably innocent. I think that we could say, okay, you could say, you know what, she was abusing her. She admitted to that. She wasn't a good mother. That's fine. But look,

it's probably just manslaughter or it just doesn't look like she actually gave the final blow that killed Mariah. That's one thing. What I hate is the propaganda, not from you, but that comes from criminal justice reform advocates like the Innocence Project that I see in this clemency petition and I see somewhat in the letter that you signed that paints her in a picture that is just not accurate to me that actually hurts your case. I mean, it hurts your signed because I'm looking at all of this evidence and all of these records far before she was convicted of capital murder. And it looks like she abused her children serially. And yeah, I think that context is relevant if we're looking at whether or not she is innocent. We're talking about a woman who's 13 days away.

from being executed by the state. For a crime that I don't believe occurred based on what I know right now, and for a crime, I don't believe she committed. I'm not the judge of the jury. And all of the things that you just mentioned, there's a number of pieces of evidence out there that contradict all of that as well that the jury never heard. But let's keep this about what the issue is right now,

and that's a woman who's about to be murdered by the state, and whether she should be. Whether the system succeeded and is beyond reproach, whether the system can be trusted, whether it was fair, whether she was granted her constitutional rights, or not. And I believe the question, the answer to all of those is no, she was not. And so all I'm asking for, all we're pushing for is the pause button here, so that we can get her a new trial so that a jury can be reconvened,

she can be re-prosecuted, and so that all of these facts, the things you're talking about and her defense to all of those things can be brought out in a fair trial. That's all I'm asking for. And until that's granted, I believe it would be an irreparable and irreversible stain on the state of Texas for us to go forward with their execution. And I don't agree with the Innocence Project on everything. I don't. They know that. I know that. I've said that publicly. But when you've got in this country, I don't know the exact stats. So don't hold me to this. But when you've got, I think, for every eight execution, you've got one exoneration of a death row inmate. For every eight executions that take place in this country, Allie, one is exonerated. In many cases, after having spent decades on death row, And to me, if I'm going to fly on an airplane and the airline company is going to say, look, we land eight planes safely, but for every eight plans we land safely, there's one that doesn't, you know, that goes down.

Well, I'm not getting on that airplane. And so the questions that they're asking, the tough questions that we're all asking about this case and others, I think are questions that we shouldn't be afraid of. Because it's going to, what we're doing, Allie, it's not weakening the system. It's strengthening the system. And I believe that with all my heart. I can't get on board with it in a sense project, especially considering that almost every case that they put forward, like the Julius Jones case, they just purposely leave out facts. They leave out testimony. They like to talk about, oh, it's just so one-sighted.

Really, they're an anti-death penalty organization that believes that our criminal justice system is racist. And so that's going to color everything they do. They're going to fund the documentaries that they see. They're going to have Kim Kardashian come out and they're going to have all of these talking points. but what they're saying simply isn't true most of the time. Now, we can be on board if you believe that someone is innocent or you believe that a case wasn't fair and say that they shouldn't get the death penalty. But I don't think it looks good to link arms with an organization that is so extremely

dishonest. And I think in a lot of ways it's actually anti-justice because they purposely leave out the truth to try to push propaganda about this kind of thing. Well, then you can have the Innocence Project in here and talk to them about that. I'm not here to defend the Innocent Project. I'm here to ensure that a potentially innocent Texas woman is not executed by the state. I wasn't really asking your response on that. I was just kind of giving my thoughts about the innocence project.

Well, yeah, there's plenty of conservative organizations. There's plenty of, you know, hundreds of faith leaders across the state of Texas who've spoken up on this. There's conservative legislators. There's a number of groups that are not the Innocence Project. Yes, there are conservatives against the death penalty. No, no, no. I'm saying conservatives who are for the death penalty. who are against this particular, yes.

Who have said on this case, we cannot go forward with this. Yes, I'm just saying that the innocence, it's not just a left-wing position, actually, just to be against the death penalty. But as you stated, there are also conservative politicians, conservative people who are for the death penalty who have their problems with this case. So give us, again, just your final argument for why you believe she is innocent, why you don't believe that she really got the fair trial. Tell us a little bit about the evidence.

that you have referenced multiple times that you think contradicts all of the testimony that we heard that really doesn't work in her favor. Well, I've talked about the interrogation and those tactics are now banned in the vast majority of states, including Texas. But do you think, I just want to pause there because I actually agree. I saw some of the things. I mean, it just shouldn't be fair that she is, she was talking without a lawyer. It was late at night.

She didn't get food or water. I agree with that. And then they're saying things like, how are you going to prove to us that you're not a cold-blooded killer? Yeah. I agree with that. I think we can agree there. Some of the things that she admitted to, though, without any coercion, without them pushing her to admit, like, why would she make up the fact that she bet her daughter's back or that she pinched her daughter's vagina or that she would,

that she would hurt her daughter the way that she did, that she would repeatedly spank her daughter. I mean, her daughter had already been taken away from her by CPS for a couple of years because she tested positive for cocaine. So there's a whole thing there. So I can agree with you that maybe the interrogation wasn't that great, and I think that it's good that those strategies are, those methods can be outlawed now, but I don't think that negates her entire recorded testimony there. Well, to my knowledge, you know, that the bite mark testimonies can be completely contradicted. Bightmark data in all states has been, we don't use that data anymore. And I think even the prosecution now would agree, yeah, that was kind of faulty. In fact, some of the prosecution has said that

some of the medical evidence they used, Dr. Farley's initial report was just completely unformed, misinformed. It all hinged on the fact that they believed Melissa committed this crime and they were going to prove it. They were more interested in Allie, Allie, in winning this case than they were justice for Mariah. I believe that with all my heart. I've said that publicly, and I'll say it here. I mean, the jury saw the photographs of her. And half of the jury now regrets it. But they saw the photographs of her. But I'm saying, you're saying, her bruised body. Yeah, her bruised body. Yeah, but they weren't informed of the fact that she had a very rare blood disorder that created very extensive bruising and bleeding.

She had bruising and bleeding her whole life. But it wasn't a result of trauma. It was a result of her blood disorder. So they could see the photos. But when you leave out the part that she has a rare genetic blood disorder, well, that's a pretty important part. Is that true? Is that proven that she had that very rare blood disorder? It absolutely is.

It absolutely there is. And that's one of the pieces of evidence that was kept out. at the trial level. And the defense attorney would leave that out just because he's bad at his job? He's terrible at his job. He's, yeah, like I said, he should be disbarred. He was terrible. I mean, there's evidence that offered by siblings of Mariahs that said, I mean,

there's one piece of evidence, one affidavit, one of her sisters pushed her down the stairs. And the defense attorney did not allow that, didn't even call that witness because he was scared of the impact that being called as a witness would have on a young girl. Well, that to me is a pretty important piece of evidence that the jury in a capital murder trial should know eyewitness testimony and someone actually admitting to doing this. Yeah, the court of appeals looked at that and they also didn't think that was legitimate because it didn't sound like that was the testimony that she was actually about to give. There were a few things like that. When they tried to appeal the case, they said, oh, you know, this witness was excluded, this witness was excluded, this piece of evidence was

excluded. The Court of Appeals looked at all of those things and really said, okay, what you're saying, those witnesses would have said, they wouldn't have actually, they wouldn't have actually said that. Like they were trying to call the defense thought about calling this one psychologist. She said, oh, she had battered woman syndrome. She was just going to blame herself because of that. So she wasn't really telling the truth when she was saying that she was abusing Mariah. But then when you actually look at the statement that that psychologist made that he was going going to give. That's not actually what he was going to say at all. And so, I don't know, I just have a hard time. None of the new evidence, Allie, even by the court of criminal appeals, has been reviewed.

None of it. None of it. So I understand what you're saying, that the court of criminal appeals may have heard about this evidence, heard it's, they may have even reviewed on their own a couple of the affidavits and reviewed some of the pleadings. But none of this has been tried in a court of law. None of it. There's been no cross-examination of the prosecution's evidence. There's been very little cross-examination of any new evidence that the defense has found since then. And so when you put all of this together, all of the new evidence, the statements of the jurors, the interrogation tactics that are now banned, you put the fact that she was, she had severe, severe childhood and sexual abuse. She was a victim of domestic violence. There was another co-conspirator that they

convicted. And that was her husband Alvarez at the time. He got four years. Yeah, because at the time that she died, Lucio was the primary caregiver, not Alvarez. And she actually said, well, a police officer testified that she said, not only in the recorded statement, but testified that she said on the phone, in the cop car, don't blame Robert, don't blame Robert, it was me. She was a victim of domestic violence, Allie. You know very well that someone being a victim of domestic violence does not mean one that they are going to go on to abuse or that they,

make up lies like this. Yeah, but don't you think that the jury should hear when you present evidence of some things that she admitted to, whether it's the interrogation or in her phone calls with police or with friends, don't you think that the jury should hear and understand maybe the motivation for a woman for saying certain things is that she's afraid of the system. She is afraid of men, of law enforcement. She has been abandoned. She's been abused all her life.

That is common criminal law procedure for those things to make it in front of a jury. The jury had no evidence whatsoever, none of her childhood sexual abuse, of her current sexual abuse, of her victimhood as domestic violence victim. The jury had no knowledge of any of that. And so in a new trial, if Melissa is granted a new trial, if we're able to get her execution stayed and get her a new day in court, all of that can come out and all of it should come out. And if it does, and a new jury's convened and decides that they want to side with the prosecution and convict her again of capital murder and sentence her to death, then the process will have worked. I just don't believe, based on what I know at this point, Allie, that that would be likely to happen. Yeah.

And while one thing that the appellate court said when this was appealed in 2011 is that there was some conflict because she did talk to another psychologist with the last name of Juarez. And she told them that she was not sexually abused, that she was never sexually abused. Then she told a psychologist later on that she was sexually abused. They asked the psychologist, is it possible, which I don't know. I'm not saying this is true. is it possible that she would change her story because she thought that it would help her later in trial? And that psychologist, which was called by the defense, said yes. So I spent time with Melissa Lucio just a few days ago on death row.

Okay. I sat closer to her than you and I are sitting right now. Melissa's been there for 15 years in solitary confinement for 23 and a half hours a day. She has had no physical contact in 15 years. Which I think is wrong in general. I think that's cruel and unusual punishment no matter what. That's the way we do things in Texas. And there's a reason that death row is not in the middle of Dallas or free.

or Houston, it's because if people saw this and saw the conditions, they might be a little more eager to ask questions about whether this is the way we want to do things in Texas. That may be another conversation for another day. But I had these same conversations with Melissa. And I can tell you right now, Melissa is a victim of severe childhood and adult sexual and physical abuse. We had this conversation on death row just a few days ago. And there's no question to me that that she ought to get a new trial, that this stuff ought to be in front of a jury. And I'm, again, I'm not the judge. I'm not the fact finder here. That's not my role. It's not your role, unless you're called on a jury. But I looked at her in the eyes with seven of my other legislative colleagues as well,

conservatives and liberals. And we believe with all of our heart before we met with her, but since we met with her, that we cannot execute this woman. We cannot. There's just too much contradictory information out there that the jury needs to hear before we go forward. And there's, there's, There's no harm. What's the harm in us pushing the pause button? What's the harm to the criminal justice system? I would say none at all. There's great harm in us going forward with it, of us rushing to it. There's no harm to anybody else. She's going to remain on death row. She's not going to be let free. She's going to remain incarcerated in solitary confinement for nearly 24 hours a day while her case is retried. There's no harm at all in us pushing

the pause button. And I actually think the benefit to the system, is so great. And I'll just, I'll just say this to kind of wrap up my thoughts on this, is what we want more than anything, what we should want more than anything, is a government that we can trust, that is fair, that's transparent. We might disagree on some of the issues, but I want more than anything, a government that's trustworthy, even when I disagree with them. And this, to me, just reeks of a system that is broken and that cannot be trusted in this case. And that's why I think she deserves a new trial. Okay. Well, thank you so much, Representative. I really appreciate you taking the time to come on. I think people are going to get a lot out of this, a lot to chew on. So thank you. Allie, thanks. Thanks for all your work and your voice. You do a great job. Thank you. You know, I'm a big fan of yours. Thank you. Thanks. Hey, this is Steve Day.

If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.