Gov. Abbott’s rush to promise a pardon for Austin killer looks bad because it is bad | Opinion

Texas lawmakers spend a lot of time talking about maintaining law and order, objectively and fairly, across the whole state. That includes Gov. Greg Abbott. But apparently, law and order can be more subjective, even cherry-picked, depending on whether your case catches the attention of the highest office in the state.

On April 7, a Travis County jury convicted Daniel Perry, an Army sergeant, of murder. Perry shot and killed Garrett Foster, a Black Lives Matter protester, at a rally in Austin in the summer of 2020. Abbott tweeted Saturday that he was “working as swiftly as Texas law allows regarding the pardon of Sgt. Perry” citing Texas’ “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law. He added: “I look forward to approving the Board’s pardon recommendation as soon as it hits my desk.”

Abbott also asked the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to expedite his requested review of Perry’s conviction, because Texas law won’t allow him to approve a pardon without a recommendation from the board.

It’s worth noting that Abbott tweeted this just one day after Fox News host Tucker Carlson called on Abbott to pardon Perry, saying on his show Friday night that the verdict “means that in the state of Texas, if you have the wrong politics, you’re not allowed to defend yourself.”

Plain and simple, Abbott’s pardon call looks bad because it is bad: What happened to law and order? Abbott has made his career on it, but now he’s using his platform and power to subvert the law and undermine justice — particularly for the victim and his family — to offer a preemptive pardon?

To make matters worse, there’s been a new development: Attorneys for Perry have filed a motion asking for a new trial, alleging misconduct by one of the alternate jurors and contending that Judge Clifford Brown excluded pertinent evidence to the case that might actually exonerate Perry.

Brown still has to sentence Perry, but could also grant a new trial. But it makes Abbott’s leap look worse: Unless he somehow knew the defense was going to request this, he was already waving around a pardon. In other words, before it even became known that Perry’s defense thinks he had an unfair trial, Abbott didn’t care. He wanted to pardon Perry regardless.

Abbott’s right on one thing: Texas does have robust “Stand your ground” laws that favor citizens who protect themselves in the face of imminent lethal danger. But according to a jury of Perry’s peers in Travis County — at least so far — Perry killed Foster in cold blood.

According to evidence presented at trial, Perry first encountered Foster at a July 25, 2020, Black Lives Matter protest in Austin. Both men are white and were carrying firearms. Perry was working as an Uber driver downtown and turned onto a street filled with protesters. As Foster approached, Perry got spooked and shot Foster five times. Perry contends that Foster raised his long rifle and pointed it at Perry first, which prosecutors say never happened.

Self-defense scenarios are tricky. What one person perceives as a lethal threat may be a lesser danger to others. The specifics aside, the jury has made a decision. This isn’t a case of some progressive judge implementing his will upon the people; it’s been decided by a jury, and yet Abbott has signaled he has no problem using his position in power to subvert both the jury and justice.

That fateful night was already a travesty for everyone involved. The jury’s decision at least provides the victim’s family with some measure of relief. An immediate promise of a pardon seems like a slap in the face to a three-year long journey pitting citizen against citizen, order against chaos, and now law against lawlessness.

With or without a mistrial, the fact that Abbott jumped so quickly demonstrates that, at least in this instance, he and the GOP are not interested in advocating for law and order. Subverting justice even once is a miscarriage of justice as a whole.