If this guy is executed...

[UpperDeck]

Cold blooded, pre-meditated murder. They had nowhere near enough evidence to convict him, let alone kill him. This society makes me sick.

Mitch--I appreciate you feel strongly on the subject. However, forgive me for asking but exactly what do you know of the evidence that was heard and assessed by the jury at the trial? On what basis do you assert; "They had nowhere near enough evidence...."?

That which has been reported of late does not in fact constitute "the evidence".

As an aside---and I don't know this to be true----I understand that there were two incidents that evening many years ago. The first involved a shooting in which Davis was by his own admission involved. The second involved the police officer. At the scene of the second incident there were shell casings found that were identical to those found at the first scene. In other words, the gun used in the shooting was present at the incident involving the police officer.

At least some of the "recanting" witnesses were disbelieved because their "new" evidence was in part contradicted by the forensic evidence.

[hollywud]

No worries, Cone! Just because this crowd eats its young is no reason to withhold honest opinion!

There is a great quote in John Grisham's new novel, "The Confession." I will paraphrase, "Killing is killing, no matter how you try and disguise it." At one point I was a proponent of the death penalty but have reconsidered my position based on this harsh reality, and the fact that there is no concrete evidence showing that the death penalty is a a major deterrent to murderers.

[boestar]

I agree that there are too many opennings for error. and for that reason it is not a good thing.

Why not put prisoners back into "Hard Labour"

Why not make prisoners productive while in captivity? They could produce things, whatever ist is isnt important. The prison system becomes a manufacturing industry. Prisoners have productive jobs and in the off time they can do rehab.

Cheap labour and they can't quit on you.

[jkavafian]

I'll tiptoe in this debate with my two cents worth. I'm against capital punishment for all the reasons mentioned above. I might be convinced to agree if there is video evidence.

How can anyone be executed based on second hand testimony? Like Mitch says, this looks like a premeditated murder.

[mo32a]

There is a great quote in John Grisham's new novel, "The Confession." I will paraphrase, "Killing is killing, no matter how you try and disguise it." At one point I was a proponent of the death penalty but have reconsidered my position based on this harsh reality, and the fact that there is no concrete evidence showing that the death penalty is a a major deterrent to murderers.

If you liked that novel you should try John Grisham's non-fiction work "The Innocent Man".

Probably good reading for everyone, it made me re-think my position on the death penalty as well.

I am still in favour of it for the likes of Olsen, Bernardo, Pickton et al where there is incontrovertible evidence.

[Mitch Cronin]

exactly what do you know of the evidence that was heard and assessed by the jury at the trial? On what basis do you assert; "They had nowhere near enough evidence...."?

Hello UpperDeck,

I only know what I've read... There are several hits to choose from if you just google "Troy Davis", but probably one of the most comprehensive is this wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Davis_case

If you read that whole page you'll find he did not admit to the earlier shooting, and the shell casing "evidence", was, perhaps a bit suspect. "A ballistics expert testified that the .38 caliber bullet that killed MacPhail could have been fired from the same gun that wounded Cooper at the Cloverdale pool party, though he admitted doubt about this. However, he stated he was confident that .38 casings found at Cloverdale matched one allegedly later found by a homeless man near the scene of MacPhail's shooting." The bullets were not checked for a match with Davis' gun, nor the 38 that his companion owned.

But in any case, though Davis did not deny he was present at the earlier shooting, he did deny being the shooter.

I don't think his guilt was ever established "beyond reasonable doubt".

[Moon The Loon]

There is a great quote in John Grisham's new novel, "The Confession." I will paraphrase, "Killing is killing, no matter how you try and disguise it." At one point I was a proponent of the death penalty but have reconsidered my position based on this harsh reality, and the fact that there is no concrete evidence showing that the death penalty is a a major deterrent to murderers.

Likewise, hollywud. Years ago, I read a book which I think was titled The Crime of Punishment written by a psychiatrist named Dr. Karl Menninger. It was a difficult decision to read it as I was a proponent of capital punishment AND I was not a fan of the psychiatric profession.

Upon reading the work though, it turned me around almost completely. He explored the history of state-sanctioned killing in all kinds of societies, and focused on our European/North American experience. Basically, society has failed the individual sometime in their lifetime and it's not their fault. Unless you get into criminal behaviour where killing is more of a tool than a punishment.

That's not a great summation, but I think the book is still available. The writer died about 10 years ago. I don't have my copy anymore - I loaned it to a friend - who lurks here!!!!

Anyway, I think it would change a lot of minds of those who favour state-sanctioned execution. To this day, I hold that capital punishment is not a just punishment for the traditional crimes it was used for. Now if you want to discuss extreme child abuse, or other forms of sick deviency, AND where the evidence is irrefutable, well maybe my newfound conviction might bend a little...

Edit: Just found it - http://www.amazon.ca/Crime-Punishment-Karl-Menninger/dp/B002MRMGHO/ref=sr_1_11?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1316724357&sr=1-11

[zipped]

Another perspective.

COP-KILLER IS MEDIA'S LATEST BABY SEAL

September 21, 2011

For decades, liberals tried persuading Americans to abolish the death penalty, using their usual argument: hysterical sobbing.

Only when the media began lying about innocent people being executed did support for the death penalty begin to waver, falling from 80 percent to about 60 percent in a little more than a decade. (Silver lining: That's still more Americans than believe in man-made global warming.)

Fifty-nine percent of Americans now believe that an innocent man has been executed in the last five years. There is more credible evidence that space aliens have walked among us than that an innocent person has been executed in this country in the past 60 years, much less the past five years.

But unless members of the public are going to personally review trial transcripts in every death penalty case, they have no way of knowing the truth. The media certainly won't tell them.

It's nearly impossible to receive a death sentence these days -- unless you do something completely crazy like shoot a cop in full view of dozens of witnesses in a Burger King parking lot, only a few hours after shooting at a passing car while exiting a party.

That's what Troy Davis did in August 1989. Davis is the media's current baby seal of death row.

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.

Now, a brisk 22 years after Davis murdered Officer MacPhail, his sentence will finally be administered this week -- barring any more of the legal shenanigans that have kept taxpayers on the hook for Davis' room and board for the past two decades.

(The average time on death row is 14 years. Then liberals turn around and triumphantly claim the death penalty doesn't have any noticeable deterrent effect. As the kids say: Duh.)

It has been claimed -- in The New York Times and Time magazine, for example -- that there was no "physical evidence" connecting Davis to the crimes that night.

Davis pulled out a gun and shot two strangers in public. What "physical evidence" were they expecting? No houses were broken into, no cars stolen, no rapes or fistfights accompanied the shootings. Where exactly would you look for DNA? And to prove what?

I suppose it would be nice if the shell casings from both shootings that night matched. Oh wait -- they did. That's "physical evidence."

It's true that the bulk of the evidence against Davis was eyewitness testimony. That tends to happen when you shoot someone in a busy Burger King parking lot.

Eyewitness testimony, like all evidence tending to show guilt, has gotten a bad name recently, but the "eyewitness" testimony in this case did not consist simply of strangers trying to distinguish one tall black man from another. For one thing, several of the eyewitnesses knew Davis personally.

The bulk of the eyewitness testimony established the following:

Two tall, young black men were harassing a vagrant in the Burger King parking lot, one in a yellow shirt and the other in a white Batman shirt. The one in the white shirt used a brown revolver to pistol-whip the vagrant. When a cop yelled at them to stop, the man in the white shirt ran, then wheeled around and shot the cop, walked over to his body and shot him again, smiling.

Some eyewitnesses described the shooter as wearing a white shirt, some said it was a white shirt with writing, and some identified it specifically as a white Batman shirt. Not one witness said the man in the yellow shirt pistol-whipped the vagrant or shot the cop.

Several of Davis' friends testified -- without recantation -- that he was the one in a white shirt. Several eyewitnesses, both acquaintances and strangers, specifically identified Davis as the one who shot Officer MacPhail.

Now the media claim that seven of the nine witnesses against Davis at trial have recanted.

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.

I notice that the people so anxious to return this sociopathic cop-killer to the street don't live in his neighborhood.

There's a reason more than a dozen courts have looked at Davis' case and refused to overturn his death sentence. He is as innocent as every other executed man since at least 1950, which is to say, guilty as hell.

COPYRIGHT 2011 ANN COULTER

[Guest]

Another perspective.

COP-KILLER IS MEDIA'S LATEST BABY SEAL

After reading the headline, it took me all of 2 seconds to know this came from Fox News.

Having the word "News" in their name doesn't make it news.

[Mitch Cronin]

Yeah, that's another perspective. Boy I sure am glad Ann Coulter's around to tell us every man who's been executed "since at least 1950" was "guilty as hell". I might have wondered otherwise.

[J.O.]

Is there a faster way to kill one's own credibility than to post an article from Fox News?

[UpperDeck]

Yeah, that's another perspective. Boy I sure am glad Ann Coulter's around to tell us every man who's been executed "since at least 1950" was "guilty as hell". I might have wondered otherwise.

But just a second. Think about what is being said--not about who is the speaker!

Mitch---go back and consider your posts about the Anthony trial. Her acquittal by a jury wasn't going to change your opinion. No Sir! She was as guilty as sin of something and deserved the worst the law could impose upon a child murderer.

You don't agree with the death sentence? Fine. You and a whole lot of other people.

But---was the man guilty of the offence charged? The jury that heard the evidence said "Yes". That is currently their law---and ours; you are guilty once proven to be so as determined by the verdict of a jury properly instructed and charged. And we live by the Rule of Law.

The same jury considered whether there were any mitigating circumstances---family history of abuse etc. and deliberated upon whether the conduct of the guilty person justified the most extreme of sentences. They, the jury, rendered the death verdict.

That trial disposition was reviewed. In light of the "recantations", the case was remitted for a further hearing. The results of that hearing were once again reviewed. The Georgia State Pardons and Parole Board deliberated for over a year. This wasn't a rush to judgment.

Go ahead; pillory the source of information but, please---take a moment and think about the information conveyed. Don't "rush to judgment".

[zipped]

Is there a faster way to kill one's own credibility than to post an article from Fox News?

Not from FoxNews. Check out the Ad at the top of the website.

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

[Mitch Cronin]

Go ahead; pillory the source of information but, please---take a moment and think about the information conveyed. Don't "rush to judgment".

Take her name out of what I said there and replace it with "someone".... same. ...le memchose... pas de differance to vivre. (as you can tell, I don't speak French)

....and I didn't rush to judgement. In fact when I first began reading about the guy, I had a slight lean toward presuming his guilt... but when I saw some of the names that were supporting him (the flippin' Pope, a former US president, and a former US attorney General, among them) , I looked a little more.

As I said, I don't believe his guilt was established. Sure, rule of law, guilty as determined by a jury, yada yada yada.... This man's lawyers failed him. ...and the state murdered him.

It doesn't matter of course. None of us matter. Nearly nothing matters... it's all just a temporary ride we're on that we invent all sorts of ideas of importance about. ....but some of us like some of those inventions. Count me as one who likes the ideas of "right" and "wrong", "good" and "bad", and the notion that killing is wrong. Bad.

[Guest]

Not from FoxNews. Check out the Ad at the top of the website.

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

Also posted on fox "news." I though it odd since they usually espouse the virtues of being unbiased and proprieters of the "no spin" philosophy.

http://nation.foxnews.com/troy-davis/2011/09/22/coulter-cop-killer-medias-latest-baby-seal

[chockalicious]

Ann Coulter is a despicable human. If she opens her gaping maw to spew more of her vile I most definitely consider the source.

[CanadaEH]

There is a great quote in John Grisham's new novel, "The Confession." I will paraphrase, "Killing is killing, no matter how you try and disguise it." At one point I was a proponent of the death penalty but have reconsidered my position based on this harsh reality, and the fact that there is no concrete evidence showing that the death penalty is a a major deterrent to murderers.

I don't think the death penalty is a deterrent to murderers. Call me cold but I'd rather see someone dead than sit in a jail cell for 25 years (or less) with a chance to walk free if someone close to me was murdered.

[Innuendo]

U-D,

But---was the man guilty of the offence charged? The jury that heard the evidence said "Yes". That is currently their law---and ours; you are guilty once proven to be so as determined by the verdict of a jury properly instructed and charged. And we live by the Rule of Law.

No argument with the above and yet I am sorry if I seem to keep on harping about the ten Canadians mentioned in my previous post. Presumably they all were subject to the same process with no doubt well intentioned people carrying out the legal process.

Britain executed Evans for a murder that he had not committed. That was acknowledged when the facts were established and had a lot to do with their abolition of the death penalty. You just cannot undo it and make amends when you get it wrong.

[jkavafian]

But just a second. Think about what is being said--not about who is the speaker!

I'm afraid the two cannot be separated. I read the article against my better judgement and my track record of disagreeing with Coulter remains perfect.