AUSTIN, Texas — Daniel Perry’s defense team on Tuesday filed a motion for a new trial, alleging in part that the court, in error, excluded key evidence that they say shows Garrett Foster and protesters were the “first aggressor,” not Perry.
Last week, Perry was found guilty of murdering Foster at a Black Lives Matter protest in Downtown Austin in 2020. Perry’s legal team argued he shot and killed Foster in self-defense.
Perry was working as a rideshare driver when he drove his car through the protest. Perry claimed he feared for his life when he was approached by Foster, who was carrying a rifle. Perry said he thought Foster raised his gun at him, so he opened fire.
During the trial, the jury saw messages Perry sent before that night where he mentioned violence against protesters.
Following the murder conviction, Gov. Greg Abbott made a statement, saying he would push for a pardon for Perry – an unprecedented move in Texas legal history. The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles has been asked to immediately review the case.
Meanwhile, Travis County District Attorney José Garza asked the board to review the evidence presented in the trial before deciding on a pardon.
The motion filed by Perry’s team claims that during the trial, they tried to introduce evidence that Foster carried an assault rifle to intimidate those who did not share his beliefs. The motion says the defense attempted to introduce three other incidents during which Foster attempted to stop cars using his girlfriend’s wheelchair, where protesters the surrounded the cars.
The documents claim the protesters surrounded Perry’s car not because they were intimated by Perry, “but rather to intimidate Sgt. Perry.”
Generally, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles makes pardon recommendations to the governor. However, the governor can ask the board to consider a case. Depending on the type of pardon, a person may or may not get full rights back.