The Troy Davis case

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. Sorry, did not get a change to read the references. Yes, the OPs concern was about capital punishment, and that is yet another subject that seems hopeless.

jimboLV wrote:This scumbag was given "every opportunity" to prove his innocence

No, he was not. In fact if you read the different statements, you will see a pattern. The bureaucratic hoops and judical orders is what is important to follow. If you do not follow procedure, it matters not wether you are guilty of the crime or not. Davis was denied using a claim that may have made everything very different (Herrera) because he (his lawyers) did not follow the stated procedure. And a witness (Gordon) who witnessed not having see the shooter at the first shooting and not seeing Davis at the second, at his second statement later also repeated this and also said that Davis was not at the party of the first shooting. And he stated that he was threated by the police to sign a statement he had not read. He also said that one member of his family (Coles) had confessed to the m urder. This was never investigated by the police! And the court decided that what Gordon had said, was of no importance!
The police already had a killer, a black man, and was not interested in investigating anyone else. That could have meant they were wrong in the first place.

stoneman wrote:Texas put to death a White Supremeist today that drug a black man behind his car and killed him...Anyone have a problem with that?

Yes - refer to my earlier post.

jackspratt wrote:Very few civilised countries still judicially murder their citizens.

Unfortunately, to its shame, the US is one of them.

There are two very incorrect Statements in your post Mr Spratt. First one is that The United States do not Judicially Murder their Victims. Certain States Execute prisoners depending on what State you are in. The States that do not have Capital Punishment are, as of March 2011, the following Alaska, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin. The District of Columbia has also abolished the death penalty and also Puerto Rico(Not a State but a Territory)

While Federal Law still has the death penalty you have to seriously commit an awful federal crime to have you sentenced to it.

To the second Part, Judicicially Murder is an extreamely strong Statement mr Spratt dont you think? In the States that do have it its because the people want it and the States they dont its because people Dont. That my friend is democracy at work!

Myself I am opposed to the death penalty having said that I wonder if some guy raped and murdered my wife how i would feel then....

Obviously my Spratt you have some problem with the United States! Coming from such a wonderful Country like Australia who are 100% allies of the United States and have been involved in pretty much every conflict they have had since WW1 I would have thought you would agree with them.... But given that you seem to Live in or around Udon somewhere maybe they didnt want you anymore? Just Joking Jack but you see my Point?

jimboLV wrote:This scumbag was given "every opportunity" to prove his innocence,

Am I alone to feel offended by the use of the word "Scumbag"?

AroyFarang wrote:

jackspratt wrote:Very few civilised countries still judicially murder their citizens.

Unfortunately, to its shame, the US is one of them.

There are two very incorrect Statements in your post Mr Spratt. First one is that The United States do not Judicially Murder their Victims. Certain States Execute prisoners depending on what State you are in. The States that do not have Capital Punishment are, as of March 2011, the following Alaska, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin. The District of Columbia has also abolished the death penalty and also Puerto Rico(Not a State but a Territory)

While Federal Law still has the death penalty you have to seriously commit an awful federal crime to have you sentenced to it.

So would the preferred statement be "the United States and many of its states judicially murder their citizens"?

(Given that the US has executed 3 of its citizens under federal law this century).

To the second Part, Judicicially Murder is an extreamely strong Statement mr Spratt dont you think?

No

Obviously my Spratt you have some problem with the United States!

I have a problem that they judicially murder their citizens.

IMHO 20 odd years of incarceration then death is a little overboard, there must be a time line where the anxiety is put to bed and a DEFINITE decision made.

When it comes to capital punishment I'm a fence sitter, crimes of political or economic terrorism resulting in death is a NO brainer. The white supremacist brutally murdering (without any doubt) an African American got his just deserts and sends a clear message. BUT where there is doubt that’s another story. I’m not about to form an opinion as to Troy Davis’s guilt or innocence but firmly believe his death sentence should have been quashed years ago.

EDIT: Jack and I have done the capital punishment thingy to death (pun intended) over many beers over a long time.

While I don't agree with all the EU does, I do agree with its stance on the death penalty. Kill the penalty, then you can criticize China for killing drug dealers or Saudis for chop chop square. Maintain the penalty, I don't see how you have a voice in the matter.

Hat's off to the EU on this one! I'm sure an EU husband would want to hang the man who rapes/kills his wife by the balls........but he can't.....and that's that.....and that's the way it should be (IMO).

@JackSpratt..... I see your point Jack, I was just correcting you as you made a broad sweeping statement and educating you on actual American law, not the screwed up notion you had in your head! lol

Maybe we should start another thread on the death penalty or we can continue here if the OP and admin are ok with it.

As i mentioned previously Im against the death penalty but I do see why some States still have and actually use the death penalty and indeed around the world, places say like Thailand! While I say I against the death penalty, its not from a moral standpoint. Let me explain......The death Penalty was introduced obviously as a deterrant to people from commiting a capital offence. Obviously this hasnt worked and therefore Im against it! Ive always been a proponent of ''Let the punishment fit the crime.'' C'mon Jack you cant tell me that there arent some people in this world that dont deserve to breath the same air as you? Let me ask you this question, did you ever see the pictures on TV or the net of that Village in Iraq that Sadam had them all gassed? There were dead contorted bodies of mostly women and children everywhere. Made me sick for about 2 days after i saw them. You cant tell me that this guy didnt deserve everything he got.

Im interested to hear your response Jack. Cheers

Davis is guilty of murdering a cop, there is no doubt.

"After a two-week trial with 34 witnesses for the state and six witnesses for the defense, the jury of seven blacks and five whites took less than two hours to convict Davis of Officer Mark MacPhail's murder, as well as various other crimes. Two days later, the jury sentenced Davis to death.

First of all, the state presented 34 witnesses against Davis -- not nine -- which should give you some idea of how punctilious the media are about their facts in death penalty cases.

Among the witnesses who did not recant a word of their testimony against Davis were three members of the Air Force, who saw the shooting from their van in the Burger King drive-in lane. The airman who saw events clearly enough to positively identify Davis as the shooter explained on cross-examination, "You don't forget someone that stands over and shoots someone."

Recanted testimony is the least believable evidence since it proves only that defense lawyers managed to pressure some witnesses to alter their testimony, conveniently after the trial has ended. Even criminal lobbyist Justice William Brennan ridiculed post-trial recantations.

Three recantations were from friends of Davis, making minor or completely unbelievable modifications to their trial testimony. For example, one said he was no longer sure he saw Davis shoot the cop, even though he was five feet away at the time. His remaining testimony still implicated Davis.

One alleged recantation, from the vagrant's girlfriend (since deceased), wasn't a recantation at all, but rather reiterated all relevant parts of her trial testimony, which included a direct identification of Davis as the shooter.

Only two of the seven alleged "recantations" (out of 34 witnesses) actually recanted anything of value -- and those two affidavits were discounted by the court because Davis refused to allow the affiants to testify at the post-trial evidentiary hearing, even though one was seated right outside the courtroom, waiting to appear.

The court specifically warned Davis that his refusal to call his only two genuinely recanting witnesses would make their affidavits worthless. But Davis still refused to call them -- suggesting, as the court said, that their lawyer-drafted affidavits would not have held up under cross-examination.

With death penalty opponents so fixated on Davis' race -- he's black -- it ought to be noted that all the above witnesses are themselves African-American. The first man Davis shot in the car that night was African-American."

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2011-09-21.html