Leaving aside some of the over the top rhetoric, I have some real problems with this whole story. Either we have to assume that a group of people is perfectly willing to ignore evidence and condemn a man to death, which I find unlikely, or we have to assume that the evidence we hear is not correct, which seems unlikely, or we can assume that there is more evidence that most of us are unfamiliar with, which seems more likely. I think this rush to judgement on the part of people posting here is kinda sad, though I can understand where it is coming from. Everything I have heard(and not mentioned in the thread is one of the 2 witnesses who has not recanted is a possible suspect in the murder, and that one of the jurors commented that if he knew the ballistic results he would have voted not guilty) suggests that there is strong reason to question his conviction, and yet those 5 people on the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles where not swayed, which means either they are bad people, or painfully dumb, or there is something else going on we do not know about.
He lost his most realistic chance to avoid lethal injection on Tuesday, when Georgia's pardons board rejected his appeal for clemency. As his scheduled 7 p.m. Wednesday execution neared, his backers resorted to far-fetched measures: urging prison workers to strike or call in sick, asking prosecutors to block the execution — even considering a desperate appeal for White House intervention.
He has gotten support from hundreds of thousands of people, including a former FBI director, former President Jimmy Carter and Pope Benedict XVI, and a U.S. Supreme Court ruling gave him an unusual opportunity to prove his innocence last year. State and federal courts, however, repeatedly upheld his conviction for the 1989 killing of Mark MacPhail, an off-duty police officer who was working as a security guard in Savannah when he was shot dead rushing to help a homeless man who was being attacked.
Davis' attorneys say he was convicted based on flawed testimony that has been largely recanted by witnesses, but prosecutors and MacPhail's relatives say they have no doubt the right man is being punished.
Georgia initially planned to execute Davis in July 2007, but the pardons board granted him a stay less than 24 hours before he was to die. The U.S. Supreme Court stepped in a year later and halted the lethal injection just two hours before he was to be executed. And a federal appeals court halted another planned execution a few months later.
Witnesses placed Davis at the crime scene and identified him as the shooter. Shell casings were linked to a shooting hours earlier that Davis was convicted of. There was no other physical evidence. No blood or DNA tied Davis to the crime and the weapon was never located.
Moderator's Warning: |
It's about time they put this bastard on ice.
I am in favor of sending 100 Innocent men to their deaths in order to ensure that every guilty one ends up there. It isn't my PREFERENCE for how it should work, but in order to ensure that the guilty end up getting their just rewards, that's the way it has to work.
Then just add it to the list of the "incredibly inhumane and stupid" things I believe.
If I'm ever in a situation where it COULD happen to me, then I probably deserve to have it happen.
So I return to my original question. If you, as the victim, are the sole witness to a mugging (say), the guy is caught and you ID him. Should the police just inform you they're releasing the guy and not bringing charges because the only evidence it's him is your ID?
Leaving aside some of the over the top rhetoric, I have some real problems with this whole story. Either we have to assume that a group of people is perfectly willing to ignore evidence and condemn a man to death, which I find unlikely, or we have to assume that the evidence we hear is not correct, which seems unlikely, or we can assume that there is more evidence that most of us are unfamiliar with, which seems more likely. I think this rush to judgement on the part of people posting here is kinda sad, though I can understand where it is coming from. Everything I have heard(and not mentioned in the thread is one of the 2 witnesses who has not recanted is a possible suspect in the murder, and that one of the jurors commented that if he knew the ballistic results he would have voted not guilty) suggests that there is strong reason to question his conviction, and yet those 5 people on the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles where not swayed, which means either they are bad people, or painfully dumb, or there is something else going on we do not know about.
That is completely contrary to a convention of American jurisprudence, which believes that it is better that a guilty man go free than an innocent man spend a day in prison.
That is completely contrary to a convention of American jurisprudence, which believes that it is better that a guilty man go free than an innocent man spend a day in prison. Your worldview is much closer to Nazi justice that would shoot a whole town just to be certain they got the guilty party. Sorry sir, but on matters of justice I say your views are un-American.
Well lets hope your one of the innoncent ones that gets included thenthis way you can live your dream
I am in favor of sending 100 Innocent men to their deaths in order to ensure that every guilty one ends up there. It isn't my PREFERENCE for how it should work, but in order to ensure that the guilty end up getting their just rewards, that's the way it has to work.
i'm fortunate enough to live in a civilised Country where the death penalty has been abolished forever after laws were passed ensuring it could never be reinstated. prior to that, the death penalty had not been used since 1967. what you are advocating above will never ever happen in my Country.
it always amuses me to see that some of the people who loudly campaign for less Government interference in their lives are the same people who are quite happy to give that same Government the absolute power to choose life over death even knowing mistakes can and have been made.
i'm fortunate enough to live in a civilised Country where the death penalty has been abolished forever after laws were passed ensuring it could never be reinstated. prior to that, the death penalty had not been used since 1967. what you are advocating above will never ever happen in my Country.
it always amuses me to see that some of the people who loudly campaign for less Government interference in their lives are the same people who are quite happy to give that same Government the absolute power to choose life over death even knowing mistakes can and have been made.
Which is part of why there isn't enough money on this planet to get me to visit your country (Ausie or NZ, I assume) or anywhere in Europe.
T Factor,Ya know why that is? Because there are some crimes that are committed that call for no less of a punishment than death. Perhaps your heart will bleed for someone like Susan Smith, who drowned her 2 little boys, or like the Arizona shooter or the Fort Hood shooter (I could go on and on). As for me, my heart bleeds for the victims and some SOBs richly deserve nothing less.
What about a child who's molested but doesn't say anything out of fear for awhile (and after any physical evidence is gone)? Just too bad, so sad? Currently police bring charges against someone based only on the word of a single victim all the time. Those of you who argue they don't, are just inaccurate. To do anything else ignores the realities of how and where crimes are committed. It's up to the jury if they believe the witness by the high standard of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt.Yes, if there's no other corroborating evidence that the person was at the scene and tie my belongings to him. There are plenty of scenarios where I might be wrong or lying, therefore the police shouldn't just take my word for it without other corroborating evidence.
Your scenario is exactly that of the women who convicted a black man of raping her only to find out 11 years later that he was innocent after a DNA test.
Which is part of why there isn't enough money on this planet to get me to visit your country (Ausie or NZ, I assume)
"T Factor" ?T Factor,
i have no sympathy for the perpetrators of evil crimes and my sympathies lay with the victims. you might be prepared to let a person who may be innocent be executed (which is what my reply was to Tigger about), but i am certainly not.
"T Factor" ?
Why can you never just own up to that which you clearly say? You were very specific that you believed the death penalty (and people who support it, which is the majority of my country) to be uncivilized and the actual guilt of someone plays no role in your opposition. In each of my examples there is no question as to the guilt of the killers, yet you still think they deserve a long and happy life. Something they denied their victims.
here you go again. lying.
T factor,
please show me where i suggested that a person who is guilty beyond doubt "deserves a long a happy lilfe". considering i made no mention of what punishment i thought was suitable for these people you are lying again. being against the death penalty doesn't mean you wish the criminal a long and HAPPY life.
getting rather tired of your obvious trolling.
Ah "T" is for troll?
But there's no question, is there, that you were suggesting that the US is just less than civilized because we do have the death penalty?
Is it just me or did anyone else just hear a collective cheer from Australia, New Zealand and all of Europe? :lol:
thank goodness. cause seriously, how much can a koala bear?
..... while I oppose the death penalty, the bigger issue for me is that i am bothered by the fact that some states have no difficulty executing a convicted party without an extensive body of physical evidence. if you're going to take somebody's life, you better be damned sure that you know that they're guilty....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?