District Attorney Ronald Earle

It is without pleasure that I announce today that the Yogurt Shop capital murder cases against Maurice Pierce have been dismissed.

The primary witnesses against Maurice Pierce are Robert Springsteen and Michael Scott. Juries have convicted both of them of capital murder for what they did that night at the yogurt shop.

Both Springsteen and Scott have made statements regarding the participation of Maurice Pierce in those murders but neither is currently available to testify. Each of them has a 5th Amendment right not to testify. Both have made statements that cannot be used without violating the constitutional right of Maurice Pierce to confront the witnesses against him.

The State is therefore unable to proceed at this time.

		WATCH THE VIDEO
	Statement to the press Part 1: Travis County District Attorney Ronald Earle's statement regarding the release of Maurice Pierce. Statement to the press Part 2: Travis County District Attorney Ronald Earle's statement regarding the release of Maurice Pierce. Statement to the press Part 3: Travis County District Attorney Ronald Earle's statement regarding the release of Maurice Pierce. Legal analysis Ray Bass offers his insight into Maurice Pierce's release.

The case against Maurice Pierce remains open and the investigation continues. Murder has no statute of limitations.

The Grand Jury indicted Maurice Pierce because the evidence provided probable cause to believe that he, along with Springsteen and Scott, killed those four girls that night. The job of the Grand Jury is to return indictments where probable cause exists.

But probable cause is not enough to convict. A guilty verdict requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

The criminal law is a precise and complex body of knowledge that must be carefully applied to each fact situation. We have had two superb trial lawyers, Robert Smith and Darla Davis, working for years on these cases.

This has been the most difficult case, from any standpoint, that Austin has ever seen. The police work on this case has been better than excellent; there are not words to describe the intensity and commitment of the officers who have worked on this case.

The team of police officers and prosecutors has come close to working miracles together. We'll continue our teamwork. We need some citizens to join up now.

If we proceeded to trial now and Maurice Pierce were found not guilty, we could be forever barred from holding him to account for what the evidence shows that he did. That is a risk that we are not prepared to take.

We do not have the evidence to convict him right now, but life is long. We believe there are people who know something that would be helpful in this investigation. We urge them to come forward. They will have an attentive audience.

The murders of Amy Ayers, Jennifer and Sarah Harbison, and Eliza Thomas left a scar on Austin's soul. The convictions of Robert Springsteen and Michael Scott have helped to provide a measure of healing to that scar. But we're not through, and we won't rest until justice is done in full measure.

	Legal analysis
News 8 Austin’s legal analyst Ray Bass spoke with anchor Bob Branson about the yogurt shop case and Pierce’s release. Q: We heard the district attorney talk about not having enough proof, explain that. A: As any in criminal case, the burden is beyond a reasonable doubt. I’m a little bit troubled by comments that we have proof of guilt but not enough to go to trial. Q: The district attorney also brought up Constitutional issues and the right to confront your accusers. If these other men have already been convicted, why wouldn’t they testify? A: First of all, the convictions are not final until the appeals have been concluded. It is very possible, especially in the case of [Robert] Springsteen [IV] that his conviction might be set aside because a statement was improperly admitted at his trial. So no lawyer worth his salt is going to allow Mr. Springsteen to make a statement at this juncture. Q: Is there anything that might re-open this case? A: There is not a statute of limitation on murder … One problem I think the prosecution may have though, in this regard, is they have already indicted Mr. Pierce. Once he was indicted his Constitutional rights to a speedy trial kicked in. He’s now been in jail almost three years. He has not yet been brought to trial. Clearly, he’s not going to object to the dismissal. But, in the event that charges were refilled, I would expect to see his lawyer raise the prospect of the denial of a speedy trial.