Fifteen years ago, Fratta's estranged wife, Farah, was fatally shot in her Atascocita home. Two hit men were later arrested and accused the then-Missouri City policeman of hiring them to kill her.
The motive was said to be money and a custody fight.
Fratta was first convicted and sentenced to death in 1995 and was granted a new trial on appeal. Friday, he was convicted for the second time of capital murder.
This is an interesting case for several reasons, not the least of which is that both hit men, who are on death row themselves, refused to testify against Fratta. I find it surprising that a jury can convict without such testimony.
The comments on the ABC Local site are very entertaining. You've got the usual "fry the bum," responses, of course, but there's also a good discussion on the merits of the case, how it compares to the last trial, and whether this one might also be overturned.
One commenter suggested that this is a case of good old Texas Justice at its worst. I try to resist the temptation to generalize like that, but I must admit the thought occurred to me also. They do lead the country in this kind of thing.
The very first comment said this:
Killing his wife that is awful, I wonder what the motive was?
Now that's a pretty bold comment and question. Do you think the motive should be considered in the penalty phase of the trial which is about to begin? Let's say he found out she was cheating on him and he went crazy with jealousy, would that matter?
What's your opinion? Did Robert Fratta arrange for the killing of his wife? What do you think his reasons were? Should he pay the ultimate price for that?
Please leave a comment.