Davis To Go Down

Posted: October 15, 2008 in Headlines

This is the part of the case I kept hearing

“Davis was convicted with scant physical evidence: no DNA, no fingerprints, no murder weapon.

Since the 1991 trial, seven of nine key witnesses who testified against Davis, 39, have recanted their testimony. These include trial witnesses who testified they saw what happened, as well as witnesses who testified Davis told them he killed MacPhail. More witnesses have come forward and implicated Sylvester “Redd” Coles, who was with Davis in the parking lot, as the triggerman.” (more…)

This is the part I just read about this morning.

“Mr. Lawton, the district attorney, said Mr. Davis received a fair trial and benefited from “an international firestorm of public relations campaigning” on his behalf. He pointed out that Mr. Davis’s conviction had been upheld by “29 judges in seven different types of reviews, over the course of 17 years, before today’s ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.” (more from “Supreme Court Rejects Execution Appeal”)

Just as it is the job of Davis’ defense to put out their version of the facts, it is also the job of the D.A. to put out their facts as well. The fact that this case has been reviewed so many times including the Supreme Court gives the appearance that Davis did get a fair shake in the system. Beyond that, all that is left are a bunch of armchair lawyers in cyberspace and beyond picking sides based on things like feelings of the death penalty, race, etc.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Pete in NYC says:

    It should be noted that the Pardons and Parole Board also interviewed the witnesses and the convicted before denying clemency. Amnesty International and other anti-death penalty groups are against his execution because they are against them all and that is nothing new and he could have killed someone on film and that would not have caused a change their position. If someone wants to argue that he didn’t get a fair trial they will have an extremely difficult time making that argument to me as it has passed a lot of review and that IS evidence of a fair trial, not just the appearance of a fair trial. Physical evidence of lack thereof doesn’t change that at all. Be well.

    Pete

  2. DarkStar says:

    I read that earlier, but here’s a major point that I think is wrong, death penalty case or not.

    “New evidence” is generally not allowed as a reason for appeal of an original conviction. If it comes up, generally, it’s up to the local courts to redress. So, as in this case, witnesses recanting their testimony, isn’t a grounds for a new trial, hell, sometimes even prosecutorial misconduct isn’t.

    When the state is going to put a person to death based on false testimony, even if the letter of the law is followed, it is STILL wrong.

  3. Duane says:

    Do you know whether or not any new evidence was not permitted in THIS case? Personally, I do not know.

  4. DarkStar says:

    I would think, but I’m not a lawyer, that witnesses recanting and saying they were forced to give false testimony, qualifies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s