Vague case warrens The death penalty

Recommended Videos

alik44

New member
Sep 11, 2010
630
0
0
The case

"Troy Davis has run out of appeals.

Davis was denied clemency this morning by the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles, the only authority in the state that can commute a death sentence, and is set to be executed Wednesday night at the state prison in Jackson.

"The board has considered the totality of the information presented in this case, and thoroughly deliberated on it," said board spokesman Steve Hayes in a terse statement. "After which the decision was to deny clemency."

Davis was convicted in 1989 for the shooting death of off-duty officer Mark Allen McPhail. McPhail was working as a night security guard in Savannah when he ran to help a homeless man who was the victim of an assault. In the chaos that followed, McPhail was shot three times.

Police never found the murder weapon, and seven of the nine witnesses who said Davis was the shooter have since changed their story.

In 2007, one of those seven witnesses told ABC News that she initially pointed the finger at Davis because of police coercion, and that she believed the real killer was one of the other witnesses. She said she feared he would come after her if she told the truth. She did not want to be identified at the time.

Another woman told the parole board Monday that she too believed the real killer went free. Quiana Glover said that she overheard Slyvester "Redd" Coles say that he was actually the shooter. Coles had been drinking heavily, she said. They were both at a party.

Coles, it turns out, was the first to implicate Davis, and at trial he testified that he left the scene before the shots were fired.

The officer's family said after the decision was announced that they simply want justice.

"This is what we've been fighting for, for twenty years," said Anneliese McPhail, the officer's mother. "We're ready to close this book and start our lives."

She points out that this is Davis's fourth execution date, in a case that at one point went before the US Supreme Court. McPhail's family has never had any doubt that Troy Davis was the shooter. They believe he was properly convicted.

There are still a good many people who believe the state of Georgia is about to execute an innocent man.

Georgia Representative John Lewis said that this is a "sad day for Georgia." "We have confirmed that the administration of law is more important than the search for justice."

The NAACP, Amnesty International, and other groups have all decried the parole board's decision, all suggesting that life in prison would have been a more just decision.

At time of McPhail's murder in 1989, the shooting divided Savannah along racial and socio-economic lines. The police were under tremendous pressure to solve the case, and put the killer away.

Davis is scheduled to die at 7 p.m. Wednesday night. This is the fourth time the state has scheduled the death penalty for Davis since he was found guilty."


This makes no sense because i though the death penalty were for cases the defendent is clearly guilty and the evidence is mounting. this on the other hand does not seem right to me. am i missing somthing here?


Link to story
http://abcnews.go.com/US/troy-davis-denied-clemency-faces-death-penalty-36/story?id=14564676

Oh and to add to this they have NO weapon,n NO DNA, NO fingerprints. they convicted him on witness testimony. so yeah he gets the death penalty cause he was convicted by word of mouth
 

Aerodyamic

New member
Aug 14, 2009
1,205
0
0
In cases where the victim is a member of law enforcement, the military or emergency services, if the death penalty is an available punishment, it's almost universally the sentence handed down with a guilty verdict.

It's my belief that the death penalty is intended to act as a very clear and loud deterrent; "If you intentionally and kill a member of the military, law enforcement, or emergency response services, YOU will also die." I don't know that I disagree with a substantial punishment, but I have to admit, as a Canadian, I don't believe that the death penalty is an appropriate punishment under any circumstance outside of a war crimes trial or court martial.
 

Draconalis

Elite Member
Sep 11, 2008
1,586
0
41
I'm for the death penalty... but this seems somewhat suspect.

The death penalty shouldn't be given based on word of mouth.
 

the.gill123

New member
Jun 12, 2011
203
0
0
These 7 witnesses, when did they decide to change what they saw? In 20 years it's quite easy to forget what you saw or what happened, especialy if it's quite dramatic.
Earlier this year, I was involved in something quite horrific, and I can't quite remember what happened that night, my dad and his partner both say diffrent things about what happened that night. The 8 months in between haven't helped us remember, now our recounts of what happened that night have blended into one, and I can't remember what I thought back then.
So imagine this but over 20 years, lots of stories, and diffrent opinions, and you will soon forget what you saw, and what happened, and pretty soon start to doubt yourself.
 

ManOwaRrior

New member
Apr 12, 2011
58
0
0
As long as there is even the slightest possibility that the convicted person is innocent, the death sentence should never be used. And since no court can ever be 100% sure to correctly identify whether one is guilty or not, death penalty shouldn't even be part of the law. It shouldn't even be an option. There is no greater crime, short of war crimes, for a state to commit than to execute an innocent person.

Most civilized countries have figured this out long ago. Go read up on the list of countries that still use death penalty and marvel about the company the USA have themselves there.
 

funguy2121

New member
Oct 20, 2009
3,407
0
0
alik44 said:
This very closely resembles what happened about a month ago in New Orleans, where numerous cops and witnesses changed their story after they shot an unarmed man on a bridge (a "looter") after Katrina.

Also: where are all the Tea Partiers cheering this on?
 

weker

New member
May 27, 2009
1,372
0
0
I think it was recently announced that it cost some area in america an extra couple of BILLION just to put around 10 people to death. After I heard that I became against the death penalty.
Apart from that many of the victims families don't feel it's satisfying to go through with it (tho that is rarely shown in american media)
 

JochemDude

New member
Nov 23, 2010
1,242
0
0
I do always wonder where the US confused the legal systems purpose for punishment instead of rehabilitation. Also proper evidence is always nice.
 

Agayek

Ravenous Gormandizer
Oct 23, 2008
5,178
0
0
Draconalis said:
I'm for the death penalty... but this seems somewhat suspect.

The death penalty shouldn't be given based on word of mouth.
Basically this. I'm usually all for the death penalty at the drop of a hat, but there's way too much ambiguity here to be sure they've got the actual perpetrator. Especially since most of the witnesses have changed their stories.

Unless there's some hard evidence linking him to the crime, he shouldn't be executed.
 

weker

New member
May 27, 2009
1,372
0
0
usmarine4160 said:
weker said:
I think it was recently announced that it cost some area in america an extra couple of BILLION just to put around 10 people to death. After I heard that I became against the death penalty.
Apart from that many of the victims families don't feel it's satisfying to go through with it (tho that is rarely shown in american media)
I'm just putting this out there as a random thought that popped up, but what if the government started streaming executions on pay-per-view. They'd make back all the money spent on getting the guy (or woman... hey, we're all equal now aren't we?) to that point because people are sadistic pricks.

Just repeating the fact that this thought randomly popped up when thinking about the costs of it all.

Adding to that another random thought, what happened to the firing squad? Use good marksmen from the military and the whole execution could be done for less than $20, and could be done within an hour of the sentencing!
it's the sentencing which is causing the costs more then anything.
videoing the event would reduce costs, but it would be to primitive to be allowed in civilized society, the man on death row should at least have some decency.
 

Dr Snakeman

New member
Apr 2, 2010
1,611
0
0
Draconalis said:
I'm for the death penalty... but this seems somewhat suspect.

The death penalty shouldn't be given based on word of mouth.
Yep. Pretty much. Some people need to be eliminated, but you have to be absolutely, 100 percent sure of it.

This whole case stinks. He should not be about to die without any solid evidence.
 

Agayek

Ravenous Gormandizer
Oct 23, 2008
5,178
0
0
weker said:
it's the sentencing which is causing the costs more then anything.
videoing the event would reduce costs, but it would be to primitive to be allowed in civilized society, the man on death row should at least have some decency.
I'll be honest, if someone committed a crime severe enough to warrant an execution, he no longer has any decency to lose. If he bitches about it, he should have thought of it before he killed someone.

The fact of the matter is, criminals do not deserve sympathy or empathy. They made the choice to commit a crime, and therefore their opinion on the matter is irrelevant.

Personally, I think executions should be done old school style. After the guy's last appeal is denied, drag him out front of the courthouse and shoot him in the back of the end. Problem solved. The PPV thing does have some potential though, because then the state might actually break even on it.
 

SckizoBoy

Ineptly Chaotic
Legacy
Jan 6, 2011
8,681
200
68
A Hermit's Cave
Whatever happened to the good old tenet of 'beyond reasonable doubt'?! When nearly all the 'witnesses' have changed their statements 'doubt' is all one is left with. *expletive filled rant ensues*
 
Nov 28, 2007
10,686
0
0
Agayek said:
weker said:
it's the sentencing which is causing the costs more then anything.
videoing the event would reduce costs, but it would be to primitive to be allowed in civilized society, the man on death row should at least have some decency.
I'll be honest, if someone is convicted of having committed a crime severe enough to warrant an execution, he no longer has any decency to lose. If he bitches about it, he should have thought of it before he killed someone.
Just adding something you seem to have forgotten about. Not everyone who is convicted actually committed the crime. Keep that in mind.
 

Rensenhito

New member
Jan 28, 2009
498
0
0
Legally, it doesn't matter if the people changed their statements. The fact that they gave false testimony under oath is too damning a blow to this case.
In short: it's at least partially the witnesses' fault.
 

I-Protest-I

New member
Nov 7, 2009
267
0
0
With complete certainty of who did what (and I mean COMPLETE,) I can see the reasoning behind the need for executions. Pretty much only for the most disgusting of crimes though.