Donations to the Community of Sant'Egidio are tax deductible
under current regulations

Also this year it can target the 5x1000 to the Community of Sant'Egidio
Write the number 80191770587 in the tax return

Andrea Riccardi: on the web

Andrea Riccardi: on social networks

Andrea Riccardi: press review

change language
you are in: no death penalty - news contacting usnewsletterlink

Support The Community

August 25 2009 | UNITED STATES


Davis Ruling Raises New Death-Penalty Questions. (Time)

printable version


Davis Ruling Raises New Death-Penalty Questions

By David Von Drehle

  Under normal circumstances, it takes a case of national importance to rile the Supreme Court during its summer recess. But in the words of an old axiom about capital punishment, "death is different." And so, on a sleepy mid-August Monday, Aug. 17, the court — over a strong dissent — dusted off an antique tool, unused for nearly half a century, to force a new hearing into the slow-rolling fate of a Georgia death-row prisoner named Troy Davis. In the process, the court has opened up new questions about the death penalty: most crucially, how far the courts must go to ensure that an innocent person — as a wide array of politicians, former prosecutors and judges contend Davis is — is not executed.

 Like most death-penalty cases, this story is maddening and convoluted. Davis was convicted in 1991 of a tawdry and pathetic 1989 murder. On a hot Savannah night almost exactly 20 years ago, Davis and two acquaintances were hassling a homeless man at a Burger King parking lot next to the bus station. They wanted his beer, and one of the bullies — either Davis or a fellow known as Red Coles — clubbed the victim with a handgun. As it happened, an off-duty police officer, Mark MacPhail, was providing security at the restaurant. When he came running to the scene, the man with the gun shot the officer to death. (Read "Will Georgia Kill an Innocent Man?")

 Anyone who has ever spent a few weeks on the police beat could guess what happened next. Coles blamed Davis. Davis fingered Coles. Investigators built a case from the available materials: ambiguous ballistics, jailhouse snitches, witnesses with grudges and the often unreliable observations of the sort of folks who need a burger at 1 a.m. The amalgam was enough to persuade 12 jurors that Davis was guilty, and because the dead man wore a badge, the sentence was death.

 Five years later, Congress, exasperated by the seemingly endless nature of death-penalty appeals, passed a law intended to speed the death-row journeys of prisoners like Davis. Optimistically called the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), the new law attempted to limit death-row prisoners to one set of appeals in federal court. Despite the restriction, Davis raised a variety of constitutional issues in his trip through the federal courts. Along the way, his lawyers accumulated a stack of affidavits from the motley crew of witnesses and from snitches of their own recanting their trial testimony and, in some cases, pointing new fingers at Coles. The Davis case became a morass of contradictory statements from addled witnesses, many of whom were either lying then or are lying now — or maybe both. (See "Top 10 Unsolved Crimes.")

 Still, a necessary fiction underpinning our justice system is the idea that juries get things right, and so over the years, the courts found no reason to overturn the verdict, in some instances rejecting Davis' appeals on purely procedural grounds. At one point, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles conducted a detailed examination of the new evidence, but when it decided that Davis did not deserve mercy, the prisoner was forced to ask a panel of judges from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for special permission under the AEDPA to file a second federal appeal — this one based on the simple claim that Davis is plainly innocent.

 By a vote of 2 to 1, the panel ruled against Davis, and this is where the Supreme Court comes in. Numerous times since the 1996 law was passed, the high court has ruled that the limits imposed by the AEDPA are valid — when they restrict the lower courts. But the Justices held open their own prerogative to issue a writ of habeas corpus if so moved. In other words, the lower federal courts had no power to hear another word from Davis. But he could make his pitch directly to the Supreme Court. Prisoners have been trying for nearly 50 years without success to get the Justices to employ this "original jurisdiction." Davis succeeded. (Read "Stay of Execution for Georgia Man.")

 "The substantial risk of putting an innocent man to death clearly provides an adequate justification," wrote Justice John Paul Stevens, in an opinion joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. "Simply put, the case is sufficiently 'exceptional' to warrant utilization of this Court's" power to intervene from on high. The court ordered a federal district judge in Georgia to examine all the conflicting evidence in the case and determine whether Davis is, in fact, innocent.

 But that in and of itself seems to violate the AEDPA, which specifically bars the district judges from having anything more to do with this case. This wrinkle sent Justice Antonin Scalia to his writing desk. In a dissent joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, Scalia noted the odd fact that the Supreme Court was ordering the lower-court judge to hold a hearing that, according to Congress, the judge is not allowed to convene. "Without explanation and without any meaningful guidance," Scalia wrote, the court was sending the district judge "on a fool's errand." The evidence, he asserted, "has been reviewed and rejected at least three times," and even if the judge finds it compelling, where's the legal power for the judge to act? (See "Top 10 Crime Stories of 2008.")

 For Douglas Berman, a law professor at Ohio State University, "the way the court 'decided' the Troy Davis case today raises a lot more questions than it answers. It also probably ensures still more litigation in the future."

 Among the questions: Is the district judge advising the Supreme Court on how to handle the Davis case or is the matter now formally in the district court again? Do the three silent Justices, who signed neither opinion — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito — have a shared view of this unusual action? (Newly sworn-in Justice Sonia Sotomayor did not participate in the case.) Is this step a prelude to an official determination that the Constitution forbids the execution of an innocent prisoner, a seemingly obvious assumption that has never been formally declared? If so, what new filters of trial procedure and judicial review will have to be installed to reach that level of certainty and perfection? In his dissent, Scalia wrote, "This court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent."

 The court's August eruption highlights once again the fundamental screwiness of America's death penalty. In the marble halls of our rational humanity, we demand absolute clarity and justice. As one of the many judges who has reviewed Davis' case puts it, "I do not believe that any member of a civilized society could disagree that executing an innocent person would be an atrocious violation of our Constitution and the principles upon which it is based."

 But most murders don't happen in the precincts of the rational or the just. They happen on the late-night mean streets, where truth is often a figment, and memory is as slippery as the greasy pavement.

October 15 2016

Human rights activist asks Pope to discuss the death penalty with Lukashenka

Andrei Paluda, coordinator of the campaign "Human Rights Defenders against the Death Penalty in Belarus", has sent a letter to Pope Francis, asking him to touch upon the issue of capital punishment during his meeting with President Lukashenka.
October 10 2016
October 10,14th World Day Against the Death Penalty

On the 14th world day against the death penalty a conference entitled "No Justice Without Life" will be held in Japan

July 2 2016
Address and the Final Ceremony by Mario Marazziti. Nobel Peace Prize Room, City Hall. June 23rd 2016

CITIES FOR LIFE – CITIES AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY 6th World Congress Against the Death Penalty in Oslo

by Mario Marazziti
June 25 2016

Pope Francis: “Death penalty is unacceptable”

Pope Francis addresses the authorities, the associations, the activists and the civil society gathered in Oslo on the occasion of the World Congress Against the Death Penalty through a video message.
June 21 2016
The 6th Congress Against the Death Penalty opens today in Oslo

The Community of Sant'Egidio takes part in the congress with delegations from Italy, Congo, Belgium, Spain, Germany and Indonesia

1500 attendants coming from over 80 countries. Among them, 20 ministers, 200 diplomats, members of different parliaments, scholars, lawyers, members of various associations and civil society actors
May 25 2016
"The laws are not perfect and judges cannot make mistakes. When you think that laws are perfect, this is the beginning of injustice", said Mgr. Suharyo

Church and civil society against new executions

Jakarta is among the 15 cities in Indonesia where in the past years the event "Cities for Life, Cities against the Death Penalty" was held, organized by Sant'Egidio in over two thousand municipalities in the five continents
all related news

June 4 2016
The Washington Post

Meet the red-state conservatives fighting to abolish the death penalty
May 23 2016

Malaysian death row convict loses final appeal in Singapore
May 23 2016

Vescovo filippino: È presto per giudicare il contraddittorio Duterte. No alla pena di morte
May 14 2016

Pfizer blocca i farmaci per la pena di morte negli Usa
May 14 2016
La Stampa

Pena di morte, Pfizer blocca l’uso dei suoi farmaci per le iniezioni letali negli Usa
all press-related

Motion Grafic "cities for life" 2012 -
Motion Grafic cities for life FR -
Promo Engl 2013 citiesforlife -

63 visits

226 visits

45 visits

48 visits

52 visits
all the related media