Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

We are going to kill you, not really, Yes we are, No we're not .. (Troy Davis)

Ponyutd

Greebo likes this....r.i.p.
Troy Davis was convicted of shooting an off duty police officer back in the late eighties. Tomorrow at seven p.m.(u.s. time) he will face the death penalty for the 5th time. He has had four stays of execution, some of the stays just hours before the lethal injection was to be administered.
The Pope, Jimmy Carter, former FBI director William Sessions, Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Norman Fletcher and the deputy U.S. attorney general no less have asked for clemency. Also, over half a million signatures.

How the hell can this be right?
 
Troy Davis was convicted of shooting an off duty police officer back in the late eighties. Tomorrow at seven p.m.(u.s. time) he will face the death penalty for the 5th time. He has had four stays of execution, some of the stays just hours before the lethal injection was to be administered.
The Pope, Jimmy Carter, former FBI director William Sessions, Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Norman Fletcher and the deputy U.S. attorney general no less have asked for clemency. Also, over half a million signatures.

How the hell can this be right?
Links?
 
He has been inside for 22yrs already. If he had been jailed for murder in the UK at his age he would be looking at parole quite soon.
 
Thanks. Have signed and shared.

one other thing that strikes me as very sad is that in this country we need security guards at McDonalds. :(
 
No stay of execution. I think he's due to die in an hour.

Absolute fucking barbarians.
 
Attorneys for Georgia death row inmate Troy Davis filing last-minute appeal to halt execution later today
 
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/20...-to-intervene-before-troy-davis-was-executed/
*Troy Davis is to be executed at 7 pm ET today, September 21. If executed today, Georgia will have executed a man on a day recognized as the International Day of Peace.


In recent years, Mr. Davis’ defense has made numerous unsuccessful attempts to obtain a hearing to present post-conviction evidence, including affidavits from the seven out of nine non-police witnesses who have recanted or changed their testimony subsequent to the conviction. In 2007, a Georgia trial-level judge dismissed Mr. Davis appeal for a new trial without conducting a hearing. On 17 March 2008, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled on the appeal against this decision. In a 4-3 ruling, it decided that the lower court had not abused its discretion.
The Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court authored the dissenting opinion. She noted that “nearly every witness who identified Davis as the shooter at trial has now disclaimed his or her ability to do so reliably”. Most importantly from the perspective of international law, the Chief Justice argued that “this case illustrates that this Court’s approach in extraordinary motions for new trials based on new evidence is overly rigid and fails to allow an adequate inquiry into the fundamental question, which is whether or not an innocent person might have been convicted or even, as in this case, might be put to death.”
 
I can't help but get the impression that the state governors and individuals on these parole boards, who receive the please for clemency in cases which are clearly not open and shut, actually enjoy saying, "no, fuck you, we're going to kill you anyway, just because we can."

I can't really see any other reason not to reexamine a case that has so many question marks hanging over it. Barbarians indeed.:(
 
There was a trial. He was found guilty. There has then been a period of 22 years and multiple appeals, all of which appeals have failed.

I do not subscribe to the view that the final appeal board would have refused to commute the sentence on a whim, nor that they would let the man die simply because they could bring about his death.

What I do subscribe to is that there has been a lengthy appeal process, during which all the evidence has been heard, and judgement has been delivered on that basis.

Unless someone on the boards has been in court for every hearing, they cannot state with certainty whether the man is innocent or not.

I feel that too many of the comments above are more concerned with their abhorrence of the death penalty, whilst impugning the impartiality of the US legal system. You may not like it, but it has scrupulously followed the system laid down in a democratic sovereign state.

Not having seen the evidence in full, just like everyone else here, I don't know whether the man is guilty or not.
No stay of execution. I think he's due to die in an hour.

Absolute fucking barbarians.

Really? How do you describe the murderer then? The policeman who was killed, was he granted a lengthy period of appeal after appeal? Was he given his full rights under the law? No, of course he wasn't. I think you are rather confused as who is the barbarian in this situation. The US is a democratic country, if the populace wished the death penalty to be ended, it would. Incidentally, if any British government had the guts to hold a referendum on restoration of the death penalty, the bleeding heart liberals would lose.
 
Aside from the wrongs/ rights about the death penalty. People can't really argue it's "cheaper than jailing them" when you have 22 years of jails and numerous and lengthy appeals process.
 
7 of the 9 witnesses of the original prosecution have changed their statements Sas some of whom say they were pressured into making those original statements and feared incarceration unless they "Played ball with the law" as the lyrics go. Several witnesses have stated another person has admitted to the killing and it was known after the trial that that person owned a 38 (The weapon used). A retrial in light of those facts would be a just way to proceed.

Killing a man when there's so much doubt is a bit barbaric. If he did do it, under the law of the land he should die but he's entitled to a fair trial. That's not been the case if you read the information that's available.
 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/protests-as-troy-davis-execution-nears-2358528.html

Well unless a small miracle has happened the man's probably dead soon. The stuff about a polygraph test is interesting, even his own response.

"He doesn't want to spend three hours away from his family on what could be the last day of his life if it won't make any difference," Mr Marsh said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/audio/2011/sep/21/troy-davis-recording?intcmp=239

In 2008, death row inmate Troy Davis recorded a statement for a Council of Europe event on the death penalty. Here, courtesy of Amnesty International, is the recording

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/21/troy-davis-10-reasons?newsfeed=true

Troy Davis: 10 reasons why he should not be executed

In 2007 the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles, the body which has the final say in the state on whether executions should go ahead, made a solemn promise. Troy Davis, the prisoner who is scheduled to die by lethal injection at 7pm local time on Wednesday, would never be put to death unless there was "no doubt" about his guilt.
Here are 10 reasons why the board – which decided on Tuesday to allow the execution to go ahead – has failed to deliver on its promise and why a man who is very possibly innocent will be killed in the name of American justice.
1. Of the nine witnesses who appeared at Davis's 1991 trial who said they had seen Davis beating up a homeless man in a dispute over a bottle of beer and then shooting to death a police officer, Mark MacPhail, who was acting as a good samaritan, seven have since recanted their evidence.
2. One of those who recanted, Antoine Williams, subsequently revealed they had no idea who shot the officer and that they were illiterate – meaning they could not read the police statements that they had signed at the time of the murder in 1989. Others said they had falsely testified that they had overheard Davis confess to the murder.
3. Many of those who retracted their evidence said that they had been cajoled by police into testifying against Davis. Some said they had been threatened with being put on trial themselves if they did not co-operate.
4. Of the two of the nine key witnesses who have not changed their story publicly, one has kept silent for the past 20 years and refuses to talk, and the other is Sylvester Coles. Coles was the man who first came forward to police and implicated Davis as the killer. But over the past 20 years evidence has grown that Coles himself may be the gunman and that he was fingering Davis to save his own skin.
5. In total, nine people have come forward with evidence that implicates Coles. Most recently, on Monday the George Board of Pardons and Paroles heard from Quiana Glover who told the panel that in June 2009 she had heard Coles, who had been drinking heavily, confess to the murder of MacPhail.
6. Apart from the witness evidence, most of which has since been cast into doubt, there was no forensic evidence gathered that links Davis to the killing.
7. In particular, there is no DNA evidence of any sort. The human rights group the Constitution Project points out that three-quarters of those prisoners who have been exonerated and declared innocent in the US were convicted at least in part on the basis of faulty eyewitness testimony.
8. No gun was ever found connected to the murder. Coles later admitted that he owned the same type of .38-calibre gun that had delivered the fatal bullets, but that he had given it away to another man earlier on the night of the shooting.
9. Higher courts in the US have repeatedly refused to grant Davis a retrial on the grounds that he had failed to "prove his innocence". His supporters counter that where the ultimate penalty is at stake, it should be for the courts to be beyond any reasonable doubt of his guilt.
10. Even if you set aside the issue of Davis's innocence or guilt, the manner of his execution tonight is cruel and unnatural. If the execution goes ahead as expected, it would be the fourth scheduled execution date for this prisoner. In 2008 he was given a stay just 90 minutes before he was set to die. Experts in death row say such multiple experiences with imminent death is tantamount to torture.
 
There was a trial. He was found guilty. There has then been a period of 22 years and multiple appeals, all of which appeals have failed.

I do not subscribe to the view that the final appeal board would have refused to commute the sentence on a whim, nor that they would let the man die simply because they could bring about his death.

What I do subscribe to is that there has been a lengthy appeal process, during which all the evidence has been heard, and judgement has been delivered on that basis.

Unless someone on the boards has been in court for every hearing, they cannot state with certainty whether the man is innocent or not.

I feel that too many of the comments above are more concerned with their abhorrence of the death penalty, whilst impugning the impartiality of the US legal system. You may not like it, but it has scrupulously followed the system laid down in a democratic sovereign state.

Not having seen the evidence in full, just like everyone else here, I don't know whether the man is guilty or not.


Really? How do you describe the murderer then? The policeman who was killed, was he granted a lengthy period of appeal after appeal? Was he given his full rights under the law? No, of course he wasn't. I think you are rather confused as who is the barbarian in this situation. The US is a democratic country, if the populace wished the death penalty to be ended, it would. Incidentally, if any British government had the guts to hold a referendum on restoration of the death penalty, the bleeding heart liberals would lose.

What a fucking shocker.
 
7 of the 9 witnesses of the original prosecution have changed their statements Sas some of whom say they were pressured into making those original statements and feared incarceration unless they "Played ball with the law" as the lyrics go. Several witnesses have stated another person has admitted to the killing and it was known after the trial that that person owned a 38 (The weapon used). A retrial in light of those facts would be a just way to proceed.

Killing a man when there's so much doubt is a bit barbaric. If he did do it, under the law of the land he should die but he's entitled to a fair trial. That's not been the case if you read the information that's available.

Fair enough. As I said, not having seen all the evidence, there is no way that I could venture an opinion on guilt or innocence.If the highlighted text is correct, then it is indeed strange that the judiciary haven't found that a retrial is necessary.

We all have our own opinion on capital punishment, some agree some don't. Each view is perfectly valid. I must say though, the were I to sit on a jury where a guilty verdict would mean the death penalty, the evidence would have to be absolutely compelling. The slightest hint of doubt and you would have to vote for not guilty. I do recognise the finality of death; a posthumous pardon is no good for the person who has been executed, but I do feel that there certain crimes which deserve the death penalty.

Quite a disturbing case.
 
Back
Top Bottom