Robert Fratta was arrested shortly after his wife's death in November of 1994 and first convicted in April of 1996 of Capital Murder. It is important to note that Robert was convicted of ARRANGING his estranged wife's death, not shooting her.

Mr. Fratta had custody of his children on the evening of his wife's death.  He picked them up for his usual visit, took them to Wyatt's cafeteria for dinner then to church for Catechism class.  Afterwards, they stopped by his house to check on a sick pet and then bought lotto tickets before taking the children home to their mother.

When they arrived, Mr. Fratta saw police tape all around the house.  He told his children to wait in the car.  When he got out, he thought he saw Farah out of the corner of his eye.  He was headed in what he thought was her direction to joke about this possibly being some sort of drug raid.  An officer stopped him and told him what happened.  They did not say that she had expired, only that she was shot.

They asked if Mr. Fratta would follow them to the station at 601 lockwood for questioning.  Mr. Fratta was concerned about who would keep the children and wanted to know about his wife's condition.  He was told that she was going to be okay.  He was told that he would be questioned quickly and then sent on his way.  He wanted to cooperate and help in any way he could.  He asked a neighbor to watch the children for him.

Mr. Fratta followed officers in his own vehicle to the station at 601 lockwood.  Once there he was asked to sit at a detectives desk, asked to empty his pockets, turn over his keys, etc.  Then he was pushed into an interrogation room against his will.  Detectives testified in a pretrial hearing, that he went straight to the interrogation room.  That is a lie.  If that had happened, then the (only) one hour video of the interrogation that we have would show him with his jacket and fanny pack on.   The media interview the following day shows him with is jacket and fanny pack.  It even shows that they still had his keys because they tossed them to him during that interview.

While at the station he was denied the right to call an attorney. Mr. Fratta is hypoglycemic and was also denied food while he was held for 15 1/2 hours.

He was promised that if he would just sign a statement he could immediately leave, get his children and check on his wife.  This was also a lie.  During that 15 1/2 hours he was handcuffed to a chair, kicked and hit.  Video of the entire 15 1/2 hour interrogation seems to have been misplaced by either the department or the D.A.'s office.

Sometime later a gun turned up in a robbery attempt.  Then and ONLY then did Mrs. Fratta's father, Lex Baquer, come forward to claim that gun belonged to Robert Fratta.  This gun was left at the Fratta home when Robert moved out.   Farah had given the gun to her father for safe keeping but even after her home was broken into one night, her father still did not return the gun to her but claims he gave the gun to Mr. Fratta, whom he says his daughter was afraid of.

Mary Gipp, the girlfriend of Joe Prystash (convicted of driving the get away car) testified that the gun she saw the night of Farah's death was silver. The gun registered to Robert Fratta  was midnight blue.  (Almost black).

Robert has maintained his complete innocence throughout the entire ordeal and has been punished for something that he did not do.

His trial attorneys have documented countless instances throughout the trial(s)  where hearsay and circumstantial evidence was allowed. In addition, critical evidence and testimony was disallowed that would have established his innocence. This entire case has been prejudiced by inaccurate and biased media coverage from the very beginning.

In less than 24 hours following the crime, Harris County detectives released statements to the press that Robert Fratta was lying although they had not bothered to thoroughly investigate the crime.  One of the most famous of those media interviews was played over and over in court in his second trial.  Yet they did not let the jury hear what was being said on that video.  If they had, they would have heard one of the detectives say that Mr. Fratta asked for an attorney, they claimed they asked him what the name of his attorney was and that he could not tell them.  When in fact, he did have an attorney because he was going through a divorce.  They would have heard Mr. Fratta say that he did in fact ask to call his attorney.

It was no secret that he was frustrated and disgusted with the way the custody case was being handled. He vented to his friends statements such as "I don't understand why this is happening or how to come to an agreement with her". "I wish she would just go away", "I wish she was dead!" Almost 3 years later, she was killed. His friends, after learning of her death, relayed these statements to the detectives who were investigating her death. Normally, these second hand statements are considered hearsay and is not admissible in a court of law. This is an example of the type of "evidence" that was used to convict this innocent man.

It is a fact that the victim's family is prominent in the local Houston community and may have strong political connections. They directed and motivated the media throughout both trials and this conduct may have influenced the judicial system, resulting in these unfair trials.

Robert's career before his arrest included employment as a fire fighter, emergency care technician and safety officer in Houston, Texas for many years. Now, the community that he was once entrusted to protect and serve, while putting his own life on the line, has turned against him.

As you go through this site, you will see that there are many things that need to be investigated in his case.  There are many facts that have been over looked.  Robert Fratta needs Federal intervention from the FBI in Washington.  Someone to actually look into the corruption that has gone on in his case.

Please keep checking back.  We will be putting up facts, information and evidence that the public has never heard and that was not allowed to be presented at either trial.