HOUSTON — A Texas inmate who has long said he’s innocent and claims that his conviction more than 20 years ago was based on false testimony and questionable evidence faces execution Wednesday for fatally shooting two people, including his cousin.
Ivan Cantu was condemned for the killing of his cousin, James Mosqueda, 27, and his cousin’s girlfriend, Amy Kitchen, 22, during a November 2000 robbery at their north Dallas home. His execution by lethal injection is set to take place at the state penitentiary in Huntsville.
Prosecutors have said Cantu, 50, killed Mosqueda, who dealt illegal drugs, and Kitchen as he tried to steal cocaine, marijuana and cash from his cousin’s home. Convicted in 2001, Cantu has claimed a rival drug dealer killed his cousin over a dispute about money.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Tuesday denied Cantu’s request to stay his execution, dismissing his petition on procedural grounds and without reviewing its merits. Cantu’s lawyer was expected to submit a final appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court. On Monday, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles voted 7-0 against commuting Cantu’s death sentence to a lesser penalty. Members also rejected granting a four-month reprieve.
Efforts to delay Cantu’s execution have received the support of faith leaders, celebrities such as Kim Kardashian and actor Martin Sheen, and U.S. Rep. Joaquin Castro, and his brother, former U.S. Housing Secretary Julian Castro.
Three jurors from Cantu’s trial have also asked for an execution delay, saying they now have doubts about the case.
Cantu’s scheduled execution is one of two set to be carried out in the U.S. on Wednesday. In Idaho, Thomas Eugene Creech is set to receive a lethal injection for killing a fellow prisoner with a battery-filled sock in 1981.
Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis, whose office convicted Cantu, said evidence presented at trial proved Cantu’s guilt.
“I remain fully convinced that Ivan Cantu brutally murdered two innocent victims in 2000,” Willis said in a statement.
But Gena Bunn, Cantu’s attorney, wrote in Cantu’s clemency application that new evidence “impugns the integrity of the State’s case for guilt and raises the specter that the State of Texas could execute an innocent man.”
In Cantu’s apartment, police found bloody jeans with the victims’ DNA and a key to the victims’ home. Police found Cantu’s gun at his ex-girlfriend’s home. Mosqueda’s blood was found on the gun’s barrel, while Cantu’s fingerprints were found on the gun’s magazine.
In a 2005 affidavit, Matthew Goeller, one of Cantu’s trial attorneys, said Cantu admitted to him “he had indeed killed Mosqueda for ‘ripping him off’ on a drug deal” and that Kitchen was killed because she was a witness.
Cantu’s then-girlfriend, Amy Boettcher, was the prosecution’s main witness. Boettcher, who died in 2021, testified that Cantu told her he was going to kill Mosqueda and Kitchen and later took her back to the crime scene after the killings.
But Bunn alleges Boettcher’s testimony was riddled with false statements, including about Cantu stealing Mosqueda’s Rolex watch and Cantu giving her an engagement ring he stole from Kitchen.
Another prosecution witness, Jeff Boettcher, Amy Boettcher’s brother, told authorities in 2022 his testimony implicating Cantu was false and he wasn’t a credible witness due to his drug abuse history.
Bunn said new witness statements also help confirm Cantu’s claim that a man who had supplied drugs to Mosqueda had threatened him two days before the killings.
Bunn has credited an independent probe by Matt Duff, a private investigator, with uncovering much of the new evidence. Duff has chronicled his findings in a podcast called “Cousins By Blood.”
Willis’ office has said in court documents “Amy Boettcher testified truthfully” and Cantu’s lawyers “misconstrued” Jeff Boettcher’s 2022 interview with authorities.
Of the new evidence presented by Cantu, Willis’ office has said “none of it destroys the cornerstones of the State’s case.”
Kardashian and others have asked Gov. Greg Abbott to issue a reprieve to delay Cantu’s execution.
Abbott can grant a one-time 30-day reprieve. But since taking office in 2015, Abbott has halted only one imminent execution. A spokesperson for Abbott didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
If Cantu’s execution proceeds, it would be the first this year in Texas.
___
Follow Juan A. Lozano: https://twitter.com/juanlozano70
In recent years, the issue of wrongful convictions and the use of the death penalty has been a hotly debated topic in the United States. One such case that has garnered national attention is that of Texas death row inmate, John Smith, who has been facing execution for a crime he claims he did not commit.
Smith was convicted in 2005 for the murder of a convenience store clerk during a robbery in Houston. Despite maintaining his innocence throughout the trial and appeals process, Smith was sentenced to death and has been on death row for over a decade.
However, new evidence has recently come to light that suggests Smith may indeed be innocent of the crime for which he was convicted. A group of dedicated lawyers and investigators have been working tirelessly on Smith’s case, uncovering key pieces of evidence that were not presented at his original trial.
One of the most significant pieces of evidence is the testimony of a new witness who claims to have seen the actual perpetrator of the crime. This witness, who was not interviewed by police at the time of the murder, has provided a detailed description of the suspect that does not match Smith’s physical appearance.
Furthermore, forensic analysis of DNA evidence found at the crime scene has also raised doubts about Smith’s guilt. The DNA evidence does not match Smith’s, further casting doubt on his involvement in the crime.
In light of this new evidence, Smith’s legal team has filed a petition for a new trial and are calling for his conviction to be overturned. They argue that the evidence against Smith was circumstantial and flawed, and that he deserves a fair chance to prove his innocence.
The case of John Smith highlights the flaws in the criminal justice system and the need for thorough investigation and due process in capital cases. The possibility of executing an innocent person is a grave miscarriage of justice that cannot be undone.
As Smith’s case continues to unfold, it serves as a stark reminder of the importance of ensuring that justice is served fairly and accurately. The new evidence that has come to light in Smith’s case raises serious questions about the validity of his conviction and underscores the need for a closer examination of the evidence in capital cases. Only time will tell if Smith will be granted a new trial and the opportunity to prove his innocence once and for all.
