COMMENTS: 6
After Third Stay of Execution, Could Troy Davis Win a New Trial?
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email.
Davis had fulfilled the requirements required for "a provisional stay of execution," the court ruled on Friday. The stay gives time for Davis's lawyers to apply for a new appeal.
Two days earlier, Davis's lawyers had argued that Davis was innocent and his execution would be a violation of the 8th and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
Davis, who was set to die on Monday, Oct. 27 for the 1989 murder of Savannah police officer Mark Allen MacPhail, had appeared to have exhausted all his legal avenues to prevent his execution.
On Oct. 14, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it would not take up his appeal, three weeks after granting him a stay of execution just two hours before a scheduled execution.
Since Davis's 1991 conviction, seven of the nine eyewitnesses called by the prosecution have changed or recanted their testimonies in sworn affidavits.
Attorneys for Davis have argued that these recantations, coupled with the fact that the prosecution never produced a murder weapon or physical evidence linking Davis to the crime, left too much doubt to carry out an execution.
Davis has gone through a grueling series of appeals, trying desperately to get any court to hear new evidence and possibly grant a new hearing or trial.
"It's a first step toward what we've been asking for a decade, which is getting our evidence heard before a judge," Jason Ewart, lead attorney for Davis, told IPS after the court announcement of the latest stay of execution.
Davis's attorneys have 15 days to file their legal arguments justifying an appeal. The Georgia attorney general's office will then have 10 days to file a response. The appeals court will then decide whether to grant Davis permission to pursue more appeals.
The Davis case represents an overall problem about how eyewitness testimony was collected, rights activists said.
"Faulty eyewitness identification is the leading cause of wrongful convictions nationwide, accounting for 75 percent of wrongful convictions in over 200 DNA exonerations," Sara Totonchi, chair of Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (GFADP), told IPS.
"Eyewitness identification is notoriously unreliable, but it was the basis for the conviction against Troy Davis," she added.
Stephanie Benfield, a state lawmaker, attempted earlier this year to introduce legislation that would have significantly overhauled eyewitness identification procedures. But the bill never came up for a vote.
Benfield told IPS she was planning to reintroduce such legislation when the Georgia General Assembly reconvenes in January.
The Davis case also represents the problem of getting new evidence before a court.
"As a result of procedural bars, new evidence of innocence in the Troy Davis case has never been given a fair hearing in a court of law," Totonchi said.
"The witnesses who changed or recanted their testimonies never had their credibility tested and confirmed in a court of law," she continued. "Had Mr. Davis been given a hearing, any doubts about the credibility of the affidavits could have been resolved through meaningful adversarial testing of the new evidence."
Davis's supporters also allege class bias, racial bias, geographical bias, and prosecutorial misconduct, as well as problems with proper legal representation.
"When people who are poor cannot have adequate legal representation … that is an issue," said Laura Moye, deputy director of Amnesty International USA's (AIUSA) southern regional office.
Supporters expressed joy and relief over Friday's decision.
"It's like beyond words," Martina Correia, Davis's sister, told IPS. "It was just amazing. All I could do was think of my brother who has faced death three times. It has to be a traumatic experience. I'm ecstatic and I'm praying that this gives us time."
Amnesty said it is "heartened" by the news.
"Until this point, the compelling issues in this case have been virtually ignored, leaving Georgia vulnerable to the possibility of killing an innocent man," Larry Cox, executive director of AIUSA, said in a statement.
Hours before the announcement of the temporary reprieve, supporters turned out in Atlanta in driving rain to participate in a mock funeral procession, marching to the parole board with a casket containing 140,000 petitions asking for clemency for Davis.
The crowd then delivered two letters signed by clergy from across Georgia and around the world to governor Sonny Perdue's office.
Groups like AIUSA and GFADP have helped bring international attention to the case. Pope Benedict XVI, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Rev Al Sharpton, and former president Jimmy Carter were among the many prominent people who appealed for clemency.
The European Union issued a statement Oct. 22 denouncing the scheduled execution. Correia told IPS she received a phone call on Friday from the French ambassador expressing support for her brother on behalf of the EU.
Stay up to date with the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fanny666 on Oct 29, 2008 8:40 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The truth is that Troy never confessed to me or talked to me about the shooting of the police officer. I made up the confession from information I had heard on T.V. and from other inmates about the crimes. Troy did not tell me any of this... I have now realized what I did to Troy so I have decided to tell the truth... I need to set the record straight.
Monty Holmes
I told them I didn't know anything about who shot the officer, but they kept questioning me. I was real young at that time and here they were questioning me about the murder of a police officer like I was in trouble or something. I was scared... [I]t seemed like they wouldn't stop questioning me until I told them what they wanted to hear. So I did. I signed a statement saying that Troy told me that he shot the cop.
Jeffrey Sapp
I got tired of them harassing me, and they made it clear that the only way they would leave me alone is if I told them what they wanted to hear. I told them that Troy told me he did it, but it wasn't true. Troy never said that or anything like it. When it came time for Troy's trial, the police made it clear to me that I needed to stick to my original statement; that is, what they wanted me to say. I didn't want to have any more problems with the cops, so I testified against Troy.
Dorothy Ferrell
From the way the officer was talking, he gave me the impression that I should say that Troy Davis was the one who shot the officer like the other witness [sic] had ...I felt like I was just following the rest of the witnesses. I also felt like I had to cooperate with the officer because of my being on parole ... I told the detective that Troy Davis was the shooter, even though the truth was that I didn't see who shot the officer.
Darrell "D.D." Collins
After a couple of hours of the detectives yelling at me and threatening me, I finally broke down and told them what they wanted to hear. They would tell me things that they said had happened and I would repeat whatever they said. ...It is time that I told the truth about what happened that night, and what is written here is the truth. I am not proud for lying at Troy's trial, but the police had me so messed up that I felt that's all I could do or else I would go to jail.
Larry Young
I couldn't honestly remember what anyone looked like or what different people were wearing. Plus, I had been drinking that day, so I just couldn't tell who did what. The cops didn't want to hear that and kept pressing me to give them answers. They made it clear that we weren't leaving until I told them what they wanted to hear. They suggested answers and I would give them what they wanted. They put typed papers in my face and told me to sign them. I did sign them without reading them.
Antoine Williams
They asked me to describe the shooter and what he looked like and what he was wearing. I kept telling them that I didn't know. It was dark, my windows were tinted, and I was scared. It all happened so fast. Even today, I know that I could not honestly identify with any certainty who shot the officer that night. I couldn't then either. After the officers talked to me, they gave me a statement and told me to sign it. I signed it. I did not read it because I cannot read.
Robert Grizzard
I have reviewed the transcript of my testimony from the trial of Troy Davis... During my testimony I said that the person who shot the officer was wearing a light colored shirt. The truth is that I don't recall now and I didn't recall then what the shooter was wearing, as I said in my initial statement...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Quotes from witness affidavits recanting their testimony (continued)
Posted by: fanny666
» RE: Quotes from witness affidavits recanting their testimony
Posted by: seaoftears
Comments are closed-
Posted by: seaoftears on Oct 29, 2008 3:53 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VictoriaSethunya on Oct 31, 2008 9:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am so tired.... After having read many truth theories (epistemology is the big word I misplaced) I still stand here where I was when I started. I read about truth as "that which was already there just by virtue of existing". I also read about truth as "that which was implanted after my existence". There are more truths out there I am sure. I don't know that it is possible to capture all in a lifetime! Your death penalty truth machine I know (with some degree of certainty)that it can not be fully captured and exposed because it has to operate behind closed doors....
With all these ambiguities about what truth is, here you approach me with a yardstick or ruler to measure some "quantity" of truth. In all the possibilities of truth, which one are you measuring? Not only is your notion of truth a curious matter to me as a death penalty spectator, I would also like to cheer you when you insert the needle on a truth you seem to with a rotten yardstick or ruler.
In Davis' murder case with testimonies receding, there is as much validation to support his innocence as there is to support his guilt, thereby planting a seed of doubt in a spectator's mind. I am curious to know why it is that in the presence of questionable witnesses (7/9? ) you still insist on Death Penalty? I understand it is by truth measurement that you decide to kill others. What is truth? How do you measure truth? What guarantee do you have that these witnesses were telling the truth earlier or now and not vice versa? Isn't this the basis for doubt...? Is this the ONLY kind of truth you rely on to take someone's life? I am curious to know again why it is that you appear to use a rotten ( they say "rotted" around here) ruler to perform such a meticulous science of injecting others to the dead! This tool as a standard to kill people who are likely innocent cannot and must not apply.
As a spectators watching, I would like to be a bee on the wall when you coin truth for the life needle, and sting you when you forget other probabilities for what truth might mean. Besides, what is a bee sting compared to a lethal injection? For if you are interested in truth, these possibilities too must be part of your final conclusion. Face the facts. If you have worked with "averages", you have worked with number sets. Many numbers....not just one! Hence abolitionist's harp: read and learn and understand.
Death penalty mathematics demands that those involved in the art of killing others understand that there are many possibilities about what might have possibly happened or not happened, and that for this precise reason spectators may always have to leave the sports arena without watching one more case of needlework! My sting for you is that truth is not a point, it is an amalgamation of points which lead some where.
In Troy Anthony Davis's case those points cause you to turn in more than one direction. So, why hang out longer in one spot than in the rest of them? Move on! Keep moving. Since you are a truth/death specialist, in Davis' case the result is you are going in diverse directions to gather the truth... and therefore since you can not ( not that you are unable because to say so might purge your ego...) bring all of these areas to a clear resolution, you see that you have no basis to kill a human being. Anthony Troy Davis.
YET, Were you a cannibal, then that would be a different story because you and I and Davis know whom Darwinism would privilege, and it wouldn't be Davis!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fanny666 on Oct 29, 2008 8:40 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The truth is that Troy never confessed to me or talked to me about the shooting of the police officer. I made up the confession from information I had heard on T.V. and from other inmates about the crimes. Troy did not tell me any of this... I have now realized what I did to Troy so I have decided to tell the truth... I need to set the record straight.
Monty Holmes
I told them I didn't know anything about who shot the officer, but they kept questioning me. I was real young at that time and here they were questioning me about the murder of a police officer like I was in trouble or something. I was scared... [I]t seemed like they wouldn't stop questioning me until I told them what they wanted to hear. So I did. I signed a statement saying that Troy told me that he shot the cop.
Jeffrey Sapp
I got tired of them harassing me, and they made it clear that the only way they would leave me alone is if I told them what they wanted to hear. I told them that Troy told me he did it, but it wasn't true. Troy never said that or anything like it. When it came time for Troy's trial, the police made it clear to me that I needed to stick to my original statement; that is, what they wanted me to say. I didn't want to have any more problems with the cops, so I testified against Troy.
Dorothy Ferrell
From the way the officer was talking, he gave me the impression that I should say that Troy Davis was the one who shot the officer like the other witness [sic] had ...I felt like I was just following the rest of the witnesses. I also felt like I had to cooperate with the officer because of my being on parole ... I told the detective that Troy Davis was the shooter, even though the truth was that I didn't see who shot the officer.
Darrell "D.D." Collins
After a couple of hours of the detectives yelling at me and threatening me, I finally broke down and told them what they wanted to hear. They would tell me things that they said had happened and I would repeat whatever they said. ...It is time that I told the truth about what happened that night, and what is written here is the truth. I am not proud for lying at Troy's trial, but the police had me so messed up that I felt that's all I could do or else I would go to jail.
Larry Young
I couldn't honestly remember what anyone looked like or what different people were wearing. Plus, I had been drinking that day, so I just couldn't tell who did what. The cops didn't want to hear that and kept pressing me to give them answers. They made it clear that we weren't leaving until I told them what they wanted to hear. They suggested answers and I would give them what they wanted. They put typed papers in my face and told me to sign them. I did sign them without reading them.
Antoine Williams
They asked me to describe the shooter and what he looked like and what he was wearing. I kept telling them that I didn't know. It was dark, my windows were tinted, and I was scared. It all happened so fast. Even today, I know that I could not honestly identify with any certainty who shot the officer that night. I couldn't then either. After the officers talked to me, they gave me a statement and told me to sign it. I signed it. I did not read it because I cannot read.
Robert Grizzard
I have reviewed the transcript of my testimony from the trial of Troy Davis... During my testimony I said that the person who shot the officer was wearing a light colored shirt. The truth is that I don't recall now and I didn't recall then what the shooter was wearing, as I said in my initial statement...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Quotes from witness affidavits recanting their testimony (continued)
Posted by: fanny666
» RE: Quotes from witness affidavits recanting their testimony
Posted by: seaoftears
Comments are closed-
Posted by: seaoftears on Oct 29, 2008 3:53 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VictoriaSethunya on Oct 31, 2008 9:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am so tired.... After having read many truth theories (epistemology is the big word I misplaced) I still stand here where I was when I started. I read about truth as "that which was already there just by virtue of existing". I also read about truth as "that which was implanted after my existence". There are more truths out there I am sure. I don't know that it is possible to capture all in a lifetime! Your death penalty truth machine I know (with some degree of certainty)that it can not be fully captured and exposed because it has to operate behind closed doors....
With all these ambiguities about what truth is, here you approach me with a yardstick or ruler to measure some "quantity" of truth. In all the possibilities of truth, which one are you measuring? Not only is your notion of truth a curious matter to me as a death penalty spectator, I would also like to cheer you when you insert the needle on a truth you seem to with a rotten yardstick or ruler.
In Davis' murder case with testimonies receding, there is as much validation to support his innocence as there is to support his guilt, thereby planting a seed of doubt in a spectator's mind. I am curious to know why it is that in the presence of questionable witnesses (7/9? ) you still insist on Death Penalty? I understand it is by truth measurement that you decide to kill others. What is truth? How do you measure truth? What guarantee do you have that these witnesses were telling the truth earlier or now and not vice versa? Isn't this the basis for doubt...? Is this the ONLY kind of truth you rely on to take someone's life? I am curious to know again why it is that you appear to use a rotten ( they say "rotted" around here) ruler to perform such a meticulous science of injecting others to the dead! This tool as a standard to kill people who are likely innocent cannot and must not apply.
As a spectators watching, I would like to be a bee on the wall when you coin truth for the life needle, and sting you when you forget other probabilities for what truth might mean. Besides, what is a bee sting compared to a lethal injection? For if you are interested in truth, these possibilities too must be part of your final conclusion. Face the facts. If you have worked with "averages", you have worked with number sets. Many numbers....not just one! Hence abolitionist's harp: read and learn and understand.
Death penalty mathematics demands that those involved in the art of killing others understand that there are many possibilities about what might have possibly happened or not happened, and that for this precise reason spectators may always have to leave the sports arena without watching one more case of needlework! My sting for you is that truth is not a point, it is an amalgamation of points which lead some where.
In Troy Anthony Davis's case those points cause you to turn in more than one direction. So, why hang out longer in one spot than in the rest of them? Move on! Keep moving. Since you are a truth/death specialist, in Davis' case the result is you are going in diverse directions to gather the truth... and therefore since you can not ( not that you are unable because to say so might purge your ego...) bring all of these areas to a clear resolution, you see that you have no basis to kill a human being. Anthony Troy Davis.
YET, Were you a cannibal, then that would be a different story because you and I and Davis know whom Darwinism would privilege, and it wouldn't be Davis!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped
ACORN Smear Collaborator Claims Persecution to Raise Money for Her Legal Troubles
Bad Policies Are Really What's Driving California's Huge Prison Costs




