(photo: dabnotu )(update below)
*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.
The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles has denied Troy Davis clemency. The five-member board reviewed pleas for clemency yesterday and did not make a decision until this morning. Davis is scheduled for execution tomorrow, September 21. Clemency or the issuance of a stay of execution was Davis’ last available avenue for avoiding lethal injection.
The execution date is the fourth execution date set and human rights groups like Amnesty International and supporters from all over the world have been engaging in demonstrations and petition campaigns to show how there is “too much doubt” in Davis’ case to execute him. [Democracy Now! had excellent coverage of the Board’s decision this morning. For anyone unfamiliar with Davis’ case, watch the segment.]
A communications log published by WikiLeaks from Philip Alston, US Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, shows Alston took direct interest in Davis’ case. Alston sent an email to the US Mission in Geneva, Switzerland on September 12, 2008, just before the Georgia Pardons and Paroles Board was to review the case. Alston recounted the Davis defense’s “numerous unsuccessful attempts to obtain a hearing to present post-conviction evidence.”
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.”
While acknowledging Davis had been granted “innumerable instances of appeal at the State and Federal level” thus protecting his right to have his conviction and sentence reviewed by “a higher tribunal of law” (pursuant to Article 14(5) of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which America is a party), Alston noted the review must allow for a “genuine review of the issues in the case” by the higher court.” He added, “The refusal of the courts to grant a rehearing with significant new evidence which casts doubt on the initial conviction appears to amount to a denial of the right to a genuine review as required.
Of the utmost concern to Alston was the following:
Such a genuine review would be particularly appropriate in this case in the light of information regarding the alleged failure of trial counsel to conduct an adequate investigation of the state’s evidence, to which I drew your Government’s attention in a previous communication regarding this case dated 16 July 2007. I also noted that the Georgia Resource Center, a post-conviction defender organization (PCDO) which represented Mr. Davis, reportedly had its budget reduced by two-thirds and the number of lawyers on its staff reduced from eight to two at the time it was engaged in Mr. Davis’ defense. A lawyer working on Troy Davis’ case stated in an affidavit that “I desperately tried to represent Mr. Davis during this period, but the lack of adequate resources and the numerous intervening crises made that impossible, we were simply trying to avert total disaster rather than provide any kind of active or effective representation.”
Citing international law, Alston concluded, “In the present case there are grounds for concern that poor legal representation afforded to Mr. Davis since 1989 has denied him both the right to a fair trial and the right to effectively appeal against conviction and the death sentence.”
UN Special Rapporteur also considered Davis’ case to be an extraordinary abuse of the death sentence process, as he informed the US Mission:
Despite receiving a significant number of complaints in relation to the carrying out of the death sentence in the United States, I have only rarely acted on these complaints. In this instance I firmly believe that the case merits this urgent appeal and warrants immediate action on the part of the U.S. Government. The second is that I take no position either for or against the death penalty but act only when it seems clear that the risk of injustice is such that internationally accepted standards will be violated in the absence of urgent intervention by the Government.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice responded to Alston’s letter saying it was passed along to the offices of “Georgia Attorney General Thurbert E. Baker and Governor Sonny Perdue for information regarding the steps taken to comply with the State Party’s relevant obligations under international law.” She noted that on September 23, 2008, the US Supreme Court would decide whether to grant a “stay of execution” (the Court did in fact step in and prevent the execution from happening on his second execution date).
It does not appear the state of Georgia ever properly addressed Alston’s concerns.
Davis has gained significant support from former President Jimmy Carter, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, fifty-one members of US Congress and individuals like musical artist Cee Lo Green and former FBI director William S. Sessions. More than 600,000 people have signed a petition that was delivered on Friday to the parole board asking for a stay of execution.
Human rights violations being perpetrated by state governments in the form of executions, where defendants are not being given proper review, are earning increased international attention. Like the torturing of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, the abuse by state governments has become increasingly problematic. In July, Texas Governor Rick Perry refused to respect the objections of the US government and went ahead with the execution of Humberto Leal Garcia, a Mexican national.
In Garcia’s case, he had not been given “appropriate consular access,” which violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The Mexico government, according to Raw Story, said the execution would “jeopardize cross-border cooperation on joint ventures and extraditions.” Navi Pillay, a top UN official for human rights, issued a statement saying the US had breached international law.
The US Supreme Court recently halted the planned execution of Duane Buck by the state of Texas. During his trial, a “psychologist testified that black people were more prone to violence.” It is believed that he is guilty but this was apparently enough to warrant intervention and this time Perry complied.
The defense does not see any way they could succeed in saving Troy Davis. There is apparently nothing the US Supreme Court can do to stop the execution. As Georgia Congressman John Lewis said about the state’s decision, “We have confirmed that the administration of law is more important than the search for justice.” [Update: The NAACP and ColorofChange.org (along with others) are urging people to pressure Chatham County District Attorney Larry Chisholm to withdraw the death warrant for Davis.]
As Special Rapporteur wrote in a UN report in 2009:
…Government officials seem strikingly indifferent to the risk of executing innocent people and have a range of standard responses to due process concerns (which are sometimes seen as “technicalities”), most of which are characterized by a refusal to engage with the facts. When I confronted them with cases in which death row inmates have been retried and acquitted, officials explained that a “not guilty” verdict does not mean the defendant was actually innocent and that most defendants “played the system” and probably were guilty. But the truth is that Alabama’s capital system is simply not designed to uncover cases of innocence, however compelling they might be. Alabama may already have executed innocent people, but its officials would rather deny than confront criminal justice system flaws…
The claim that the US upholds the rule of law is laughable when this is how the system works, when racial disparities are such that a man cannot get a proper review of his case.
Barring any last-minute developments, it is clear that the US will be making international new headlines tomorrow for an execution that may be better described as a state-sanctioned murder given the amount of doubt in the case. It is appalling given how much notoriety this case has that Georgia is actually going to go through this.
In closing, this is how Attorney General Sam Olens’ justifies the unconscionable act that is about to occur tomorrow:
Ultimately, while Mr. Davis’s new evidence casts some additional, minimal doubt on his conviction, it is largely smoke and mirrors. The vast majority of the evidence at trial remains intact, and the new evidence is largely not credible or lacking in probative value. After careful consideration, the Court finds that Mr. Davis has failed to make a showing of actual innocence that would entitle him to habeas relief in federal court.
Olens will bring great shame to the United States tomorrow if the execution does in fact take place.
Update – 10:20 AM ET Troy Davis requested a polygraph or lie detector test before being executed this evening. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports:
Troy Anthony Davis’ lawyers this morning were turned away by prison officials, who rejected their attempt to allow Davis to take a polygraph test to try and show he is not a cop killer.
There will be no truth before the cold-blooded legal lynching takes place this evening.



38 Comments








All available evidence suggests that the Rule of Law no longer exists in the United States of America, Kevin.
Bush v Gore effectively ended the Rule of Law …
DW
This is GA. The officer was white, the convicted man was black. End of story.
OT – I can’t help but laugh at the Lindsey Graham donor indictment. Graham’s big donor is named John Dong.
Well Obama could issue a pardon or commute the sentence, but I doubt that. We have no rule of law, it is pay to play. those that can pay, almost always walk away
Ain’t that Murder america, INC.
Lord bless him in his hour of need and curse the clemency (def. Leniency, mildness,gentleness, MERCY yea that sounds like an apt description of this low IQ board and this countries obsession and fealty to the death culture.
A policeman was killed, everyone agrees that a black man shot him, so by God, a blackman is gonna die.
The rest is just a bunch of ‘technicalities’.
And of course there’s the whole issue of Yankees coming around trying to tell Georgians how to run their state.
Our two-tiered so-called “justice” system is thrown in the face of the poor and minorities everyday. How many times does a wealthy California celebrity debutante needs to be found with loads of cocaine, stealing, dui, etc. before the “3 strikes rule” takes effect? How many “missing African- American” woman or children stories are ran on tv? How come it is taking so long for the poor people of the Gulf south to get restitution from BP; or for that matter from their insurance companies for Katrina?
Why? Because the legal system is designed to protect the already wealthy, equity or justice in our current system of law is an occasional by-product not an intended outcome.
It is inconceivable that the Georgia so called Justice system can be so cavalier with someone’s life. “…new evidence casts some additional, minimal doubt on his conviction…” but we’re gonna kill him anyway. Words escape me to express this travesty.
How far removed is the Georgia parole board from a lynching tree?
Is anyone surprised that another state in the US is about to kill someone who may not even be guilty?
How about the make up of the board. Are they all white , are any middle class , is it dominated by fake christians and how many republicans ?
Is is classic white / Black america . If he is in fact innocent may GOD Damn and destroy, bake , drown whatever to this country and the Fascists who ruin it.
Why? You think we should lynch the members of the board? I’m not so sure that’d be a good idea, even in these circumstances.
The fact that, in recent years, many, MANY innocent men have been released after long prison terms, including Clarence Lee Brantley of Conroe, Texas, who was just two years from execution, has changed my position on capital punishment. Many say Texas executed an inocent man recently when forensic experts disputed an “arson” conclusion drawn by a small town fire marshall/veternarian/dry cleaner.
John Du Pont shot a wrestler in his driveway in broad daylight high on cocaine .
Nobody thought to murder him for his crime.
One tree.
“The one place where a man ought to get a square deal is in a courtroom, be he any color of the rainbow, but people have a way of carrying their resentments right into a jury box. As you grow older, you’ll see white men cheat black men every day of your life, but let me tell you something and don’t you forget it – whenever a white man does that to a black man, no matter who he is, how rich he is, or how fine a family he comes from, that white man is trash.”
–Atticus Finch, in To Kill A Mockingbird
Sounds like a refugee from The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension. Right up there with John Bigboote.
I’ve signed petitions, tweeted, even called the Savannah police chief today, asking his secretary to get him to call the parole board.
I was polite, but this feels like a good old-fashioned Southern lynching.
Silver?
Thanks.
And to Knox: I realized after I wrote it that someone could read it as if I was suggesting lynching the parole board. But I meant it as EDP has interpreted it, which is that the way the parole board is behaving is removed but similar to a lynch mob. I didn’t make my meaning clear immediately by editing because I figured if no one interpreted it differently than I meant it, there was no need. So, here we are.
At the risk of being flamed, let me preface by saying I’m African-American, opposed to the death penalty, and not one of those hardcore law & order types.
Being unfamiliar with this case I have read a little of both sides. Quite frankly I haven’t enough to convince me a stay was warranted.
If this is more broadly against the death penalty, I support it but on the merits of this case by itself, I’m not too sure.
Below is just an example of a different point of view.
Folks, both pro and con to this issue, I would recommend you read the links back to the trial testimony, the appeals arguements as well as the written decisions from the appelate courts and the US Supreme Court. All we keep hearing from the Davis side is that seven people have recanted their testimony; however, that is not really the case. Several of the recantations are actually witnesses stating that, if pressed to positively ID the killer now, they couldn’t do so. That is completely different than saying that they saw someone else do the killing which not one witness, then or now, has stated. In addition, there is no way that someone could possibly identify someone with the same certainty 22 years after the fact as they could at the time of the investigation or trial. That’s why the appeals courts place so much more weight on actual trial testimony than a recantation or change in the testimony.
Also, the arguement is that these witnesses have claimed the police coerced them into these statements. Actually, according to the official records and their staements under oath, that is not really the case. In some instances the witnesses have testified they flat out were not coerced and in other cases the witnesses statements of police coersion just do not add up, either by the chronology of when the people came forward or when the statements were taken. Several of the recantations were considered at the appeals hearing; however, even though the witnesses were present at the hearing, the defense counsel chose not to call them as witnesses, most likely because they would be then subject to cross-eexamination and ultimately the recantation, compared to the original testimony, would not be credible.
Lastly, if you really examine the new testimony of the witnesses who did come forward in the form of sworn statements, none of it really deflects their recollections of the actual events away from Davis’ guilt and actually one witness really further confirms him being the shooter.
In these cases, once a determination of guilt is assessed, it falls on the defendant to prove that either he is actually innocent of the crime, similar to what you see in recent cases of DNA analysis, or that if a new trial was ordered, there is a likelyhood that a not guilty verdict would result. In every analysis of this case at the appelate court and supreme court level the conclusion is the same; a guilty verdict would result. The US Supreme Court did actually review this case and giving Davis the benefit of the doubt ordered an unprecedented federal court review of the evidence and they as well voted that a new trial was not warranted.
Just as an aside, earlier in the day Davis shot a person and the bullets and shell casings matched the casings and bullets from this killing. According to a witness, Davis allegedly stated after the fact that the reason he killed McPhail after he shot and disabled him rather than keep running was that McPhail had seen his face and could ID him and then tie him to the earlier shooting. This is no altar boy here. Every shred of investigation and evidence points to his guilt.
These people have been pissed off since we took away all their free labor in 1865. We made them stop lynching people, so this is their response.
edit: hope this is easier to read.
Folks, both pro and con to this issue, I would recommend you read the links back to the trial testimony, the appeals arguements as well as the written decisions from the appelate courts and the US Supreme Court. All we keep hearing from the Davis side is that seven people have recanted their testimony; however, that is not really the case. Several of the recantations are actually witnesses stating that, if pressed to positively ID the killer now, they couldn’t do so. That is completely different than saying that they saw someone else do the killing which not one witness, then or now, has stated. In addition, there is no way that someone could possibly identify someone with the same certainty 22 years after the fact as they could at the time of the investigation or trial. That’s why the appeals courts place so much more weight on actual trial testimony than a recantation or change in the testimony.
Also, the arguement is that these witnesses have claimed the police coerced them into these statements. Actually, according to the official records and their staements under oath, that is not really the case. In some instances the witnesses have testified they flat out were not coerced and in other cases the witnesses statements of police coersion just do not add up, either by the chronology of when the people came forward or when the statements were taken. Several of the recantations were considered at the appeals hearing; however, even though the witnesses were present at the hearing, the defense counsel chose not to call them as witnesses, most likely because they would be then subject to cross-eexamination and ultimately the recantation, compared to the original testimony, would not be credible.
Lastly, if you really examine the new testimony of the witnesses who did come forward in the form of sworn statements, none of it really deflects their recollections of the actual events away from Davis’ guilt and actually one witness really further confirms him being the shooter.
In these cases, once a determination of guilt is assessed, it falls on the defendant to prove that either he is actually innocent of the crime, similar to what you see in recent cases of DNA analysis, or that if a new trial was ordered, there is a likelyhood that a not guilty verdict would result. In every analysis of this case at the appelate court and supreme court level the conclusion is the same; a guilty verdict would result. The US Supreme Court did actually review this case and giving Davis the benefit of the doubt ordered an unprecedented federal court review of the evidence and they as well voted that a new trial was not warranted.
Just as an aside, earlier in the day Davis shot a person and the bullets and shell casings matched the casings and bullets from this killing. According to a witness, Davis allegedly stated after the fact that the reason he killed McPhail after he shot and disabled him rather than keep running was that McPhail had seen his face and could ID him and then tie him to the earlier shooting. This is no altar boy here. Every shred of investigation and evidence points to his guilt.
This is most unconscionable.
the “brotherhood” between the cops and the courts have killed thousands of innocent people all over this country, including a friend of mine. If a cop gets his feathers ruffled, the defendant is history no matter what happened. It happens in our northern town all the time, not a Southern problem, per se. It’s a retaliatory system of vengeance, and if a cop dies as in this case, then somebody has to pay whether they’re innocent or received a fair trial, somebody’s always got to pay, no matter what the evidence or lack of evidence says, when a cop dies.
This is exactly the same kind of “justice” that has kept Leonard Peltier, also innocent, locked up in federal prison for most of his life. If a law enforcement officer is killed, someone is going to die or be locked up forever, whether he did the crime or not. And if he has black skin and is in a hell hole like the southern U.S., he is going to die.
I realized that I read your comment wrong after I saw the comment @ 15. It was too late to edit my comment. Anyway, your point is now perfectly clear! And right on!
So you support state killing sometimes ?
All’s well that ends well. Except, in this case, the subject of the post.
One time in Oregon, I was walking 4 dogs unleashed in a park. They didn’t bother or hurt anyone, but a family was walking not too far away and the teenage girl got hysterically afraid of the unleashed dogs. The man in the family smacked her in the face so hard she was bleeding and told her to calm down. Another man went up to the hitter and said if you want to hit anyone you can hit me.
In the meantime, someone had called the police. Eugene’s “finest” came over to me and started talking to me about he had a mind to give me a ticket for the dogs off the leash. I said, incredulously, “What, you’re thinking of giving me a ticket when they didn’t hurt anyone and here’s this man…” When he started taking out his gun, I started back pedaling very fast and he put the gun away.
Later I heard him tell the man, that if he wanted to hit his daughter he should do it in private as people tend to get upset. I later went and talked to the police chief about his patrolman. I don’t know if it had any effect or not.
Years later, when I got pulled over for speeding in Georgia, my friend who lives there, was adamantly telling me to be VERY polite, but I’d already learned how to behave around police back in Oregon.
No, I don’t support state killing. What I’m saying is looking at the guilt or innocense in this case, I haven’t seen anything that says this guy is innocent or the original verdict is incorrect.
I’m under the impression in this case that people are making the case that Davis is innocent rather than argue broader opposition to capital punishment.
Please don’t confuse the people on this rag by reciting the facts. They would much rather rely on such superficialities as “recanted testimony” and ” white victim” and ” black suspect”.
You are right on about the FACTS in this case, as well as the trial record and the record of appeals. No one wants to hear that though. They would much rather think the big bad government is murdering an innocent black man. Speaking truth to peer and all that.
Me, I am a death penalty supporter, especially when the victim is a peace officer. I’ll light a cnadle tomorrow night, but not for this dirtbag Davis.
Were you at the trial?
Did you witness the crime?
If the answer to those is NO, then you don’t know any more about it than anyone else. And you don’t get to claim the moral high ground, because you aren’t standing on it.
I personally believe that there’s a hell of a lot of racial bias involved; it isn’t the first time I’ve heard of someone who isn’t white being railroaded for a crime, based on very shaky evidence. (There are also way too many people who believe that anyone who’s arrested is automatically guilty, and would rather believe a cop, especially a white one, than anyone non-white, even if the cop wasn’t at the scene and didn’t see anything.)
Honestores et humilores. The distinction emerged in the Later Roman Empire. It’s what eventually distinguished serfs from free men. Welcome to the new world.
“Georgia Dems call for prison strike to block execution of Troy Davis” (RawStory.Com, Sept. 20, 2011)
We’re an inclusive site, so let me be the first to say, “Welcome, cracker.” There’s nothing superficial when seven of the nine witnesses recant their testimony and one of the two who hasn’t is the probably murderer. And there’s nothing superficial about white oppression and black victimization in the South — it’s very deeply ingrained in the culture.
psalongo didn’t cite any facts. He simply said he was unfamiliar with the case and had read a little about it.
Yeah, like you’ve read the trial record. And if you had an ounce of familiarity with the appeals process in this case, you’d know that the Supreme Court — the George W. Bush Supreme Court! — sent this case back to the cracker judge in Savannah and told him to think about it again. The cracker judge didn’t feel like thinking about it again, though.
That’s exactly what’s about to happen.
Ummn, do you mean truth to power, cracker?
And even when the alleged perpetrator is innocent?
If you’re allowed to have candles, that means you must not be living in the sort of institution I thought you were in. My apologies.
i’ve spent years in georgia and what i have witnessed about the judicial/police system are simply not believed. i lived in gwinnett county. when i first came there, an old man told me he’ll never come visit me at my home he is scared to go to gwinnett as he is scared of the good ole boys and their army of corrupt police. i thought of how quaint and amusing such as sentiment was, even if mad. but i’ve learned it wasn’t mad. i’ve learned of a systematically corrupt justice system with a particular emphasis on victimizing children. and i’ve been told that if i talk about what in i’ve seen in public my daughter will have troubles and possibly be kidnapped into foster care. it’s just how things are in gwinnett and very possibly across the state of georgia and it will continue to be this way until the department of justice comes in and makes arrest but they are too busy breaking the back of online poker to worry about systematic child slavery and murder of innocents.
I’m not going to dissect your dissection of my post – there’s no point because, as you implied, neither of us was at the trial so we can both shut the hell up.
I’ll say only this – we are at 3 hours and 15 minutes before another CONVICTED cop-killing dirtbag goes toes-up. I have my candle all ready. Maybe two.
The members of this board are criminals. They should be tried in the Hague for crimes against humanity. They are the same as the criminals tried at Nuremburg. Their names, pictures and all related data should be posted on a wanted poster with a hefty reward. I imagine they ALL claim to be “Christians” and God-Fearing! Well, I hope Your God is watching now. In Hell you will pay, all five of you. Troy Davis may be truly guilty but it has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt! If at a later date, another person is proven guilty of this crime, these board members should stand trial also.