Monday, August 17, 2009
News Troy Davis deserves hearing, say Supremes
Posted by Scott Henry @ScottTheHenry on Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM
This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that condemned Georgia inmate Troy Anthony Davis should get a chance to present new evidence in court, according to the AP and other news sources.
Keeping track of the Davis case over the past two years has been like watching a nail-biting tennis match — with a human life at stake. Davis, who was convicted and sentenced to death in 1991 for the murder of an off-duty Savannah police officer, has twice three times had his scheduled execution delayed as his case was reviewed, re-reviewed and shuffled from one court to another, yet he'd not been granted another day in court — until now.
The high court ordered a federal judge to “receive testimony and findings of fact as to whether evidence that could not have been obtained at the time of trial clearly establishes [Davis’s] innocence.”
The two dissenters on the Court were Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Anyone surprised?
In his majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the questions about the Davis case indicate too great a chance that the verdict was wrong:
“Imagine a petitioner in Davis’ situation who possesses new evidence conclusively and definitively proving, beyond any scintilla of doubt, that he is an innocent man. The dissent’s reasoning would allow such a petitioner to be put to death nonetheless.”
Specifically, there's the troubling fact that seven of nine witnesses for Davis' prosecution have recanted their testimony.
Over the past couple of years, Davis' case has become an international cause celebre, with prominent backers for the call for clemency or a new trial, such as former President Jimmy Carter, Pope Benedict XVI, former FBI Director William Sessions and former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr.
For more info, check out our Troy Davis reference page.
(An earlier version of this post mistakenly indicated Davis had been greanted a new trial.)
Comments (7)
Showing 1-7 of 7
like
dislike
"Specifically, there’s the troubling fact that seven of nine witnesses for Davis’ prosecution have recanted their testimony." fact? The defense attorneys have made these claims, but have not introduced any evidence to support this "fact". The Georgia Supreme Court, hardly a bastion of conservative pro-death penalty types, has reviewed these "facts" and determined that there's no "there" there. Be anti-death penalty if you want, but continuing the meme that these witnesses have recanted is less than "fact", and below your usual high standards.
http://www.gasupreme.us/sc-op/pdf/s07a1758.pdf The Georgia Supreme Court actually ruled on technical grounds, finding the affidavits to be insufficient evidence to justify overturning a conviction. This is precisely why the evidentiary hearing ordered by the SCOTUS is a good thing--because the recanting witnesses' testimony will finally be heard in open court, complete with sifting cross-examination by the prosecution, and we will all find out for once and for all if their recantations and stories of coercion by police are credible or not. This is a separate issue from opposition to the death penalty. You can think the death penalty is a good deterrent tool and still believe that someone whose conviction is under serious doubt should not be executed before all the evidence of innocence is heard and considered by a court, with an opportunity for the prosecution to test that evidence.
Latest in Fresh Loaf
-
'Ex-gays' gather outside Atlanta this weekend 4
Meanwhile human rights groups fight the notion that "ex-gay" is a thing
-
CNN cancels Atlanta debate 2
Everybody cry
-
ARC's new map of transportation-tax projects is suitable for framing 4
Voters will decide 1-cent sales tax measure in July
- More »
Author Archives
-
New Coke-bankrolled video touts mayor in grand fashion 5
Coke and Monica Pearson do Mayor Reed a serious solid
-
AJC reboots misleading "Your taxes are too high" series 27
The AJC is asking the wrong question with its series on property taxes
- More »
