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

 
March 29 2011 | UNITED STATES

USA

Georgia, Troy Davis' appeal rejected by Supreme Court. Serius risks for his life, a plenty of doubts about his guilt

 
printable version

 

Denniston Reporter

Davis innocence plea rejected

The Court turns down, without explanation, all pleas by Georgia death-row inmate Troy Anthony Davis that he is innocent of a 1989 murder of an off-duty policeman.

The Supreme Court, without a noted dissent, on Monday cleared the way for the state of Georgia to carry out the execution of Troy Anthony Davis of Savannah, rejecting five different ways that Davis’s lawyers had sought to press his claim that he did not commit a 1989 murder of an off-duty policeman.   In three brief orders, none of which contained any explanation, the Court brought to a sudden end a two-decades-long campaign to spare Davis’s life, on the theories that most of those who testified against him have recanted and that another man did the killing, and has since admitted it.
Besides turning aside all of Davis’s requests for a new chance to show his innocence, the Court granted review of one new case: a test of whether there is a “minister’s exception” to civil rights laws that protects religious organizations in their workplace policies and, if there is such an exception, whether it bars a discrimination claim by a parochial school teacher who teaches non-religious subjects.  The case of Hosanna Tabor Church v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al. (10-553) will be heard in the Court’s next Term, starting in October.
The Davis case is one of the most highly visible cases amid scores of them in recent years, claiming wrongful convictions, especially in murder cases.  The most unusual fact of the Davis case was that, for the first time in nearly a half-century, the Supreme Court itself explicitly ordered a federal judge to go over the evidence to test Davis’s claim that he did not commit the crime that occurred in the parking lot of a fast-food restaurant and bus station in Savannah on the night of August 19, 1989.
That judge wound up ruling that Davis “is not innocent.”  Because of what that judge and the Eleventh Circuit Court had done later in the case, Davis’s last hope was in the Supreme Court itself.  But, after examining at one Conference the complex array of maneuvers his lawyers had attempted, the Justices simply rejected all of them.  Although no dissents were reported, that does not necessarily mean that all nine Justices agreed with the outcome.   In fact, two of the Justices, Stephen G. Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, had joined in a comment in August 2009 that there was in this case “a substantial risk of putting an innocent man to death.”
The most likely explanation for the result was that at least a majority of the Justices had concluded that they had given Davis what he wanted — a federal court review of his claim — and that the judge’s rejection of that claim was thorough enough to resolve it.   Davis’s lawyers had argued in their various new pleas that the judge, U.S. District Judge William T. Moore, Jr., of Savannah, in his 172-page decision last August, had in fact not considered all of the evidence that would help support a finding of innocence.  A majority of the Court apparently was not persuaded that there was a sufficient flaw in the way Judge Moore approached the case.   After Judge Moore had ruled, the Eleventh Circuit Court concluded that it had no authority to review the case, since the Supreme Court had sent it to Judge Moore, so a return to the Supreme Court was the only open avenue of appeal.
In returning to the Supreme Court, Davis’s attorneys had said they preferred a return of the case to the Eleventh Circuit, contending that it did, in fact, have the authority to review Judge Moore’s opinion.  But, if the Court were unwilling to take that step (advocated in Davis v. Humphrey, 10-949, which the Court did deny Monday), his counsel asked the Justices to review themselves the evidence to support his claim.   In response to that alternative request, the Court on Monday dismissed his appeal, along with a plea for an original habeas writ, and a plea for a common law writ (all put forth in Davis v. Humphrey, 10-950).  Usually, when the Court dismisses a case (which takes at least five votes), it gives a reason; this time, it did not.
As a final rejection, the Court denied Davis’s first original habeas writ — the one that had led the Court, in August of last year, to order the case reviewed in District Court in Savannah.   That plea had remained on the Court’s docket (In re Davis, 08-1443) since the Court’s order giving Davis the further chance to press his evidence.   All told, then, the Court disposed of five separate legal avenues that his lawyers had outlined.
It now appears that state officials in Georgia are free to schedule a new execution date.  Davis was within two hours of being executed in September 2008, when the Supreme Court blocked the state from carrying it out, until the Justices could act on the habeas writ plea in In re Davis.   With Monday’s order denying that plea, the stay of his execution was lifted automatically.
In turning aside all legal requests, the Court bypassed a chance to answer two fundamental questions that the Court has never answered explicitly about convicted individuals’ claims of innocence: one, whether the Constitution bars the execution of an individual who is actually innocent of the crime, and, two, what standard of proof are federal judges to use in judging whether an individual actually is innocent.   In Judge Moore’s decision, he ruled that it would be unconstitutional to execute someone who is actually innocent, but set a fairly tough standard of proof; applying that standard, he found that Davis is not innocent. 
On Monday, that decision became final.

 

RELATED NEWS
November 29 2016
BELARUS

Death convict Ivan Kulesh executed

November 29 2016

On November 30th join the World Day of the Cities for Life against the death penalty


How, when and where to join all over the world. The map of the cities, latest news, video. Visit this page for updates and share it! The hashtag is #nodeathpenalty
November 29 2016
UNITED STATES
Join the lay Catholic Community of Sant'Egidio

Various locations throughout the Florida dioceses will again participate in the International Day of Cities for Life


You are invited to attend an event in your area! Cities for Life, Against the Death Penalty
November 21 2016
NEW YORK, UNITED STATES
The results at the Third Committee of the General Assembly, the committee regarding issues relating to human rights, show momentum against the death penalty in the world

Death Penalty: the yes vote increases at the Third UN Committee, reaching a total of 115


Its resolution is debated and voted every other year
November 8 2016
KENYA

Death penalty: Sant'Egidio in Nairobi. From commuting sentences to humanizing society

November 5 2016
ZIMBABWE

10 death row inmates freed

all related news

ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 28 2016
AP

High court to examine mental disability, death penalty issue
November 12 2016
Internazionale

Si rafforza la pena di morte negli Stati Uniti
November 11 2016

Al liceo classico “Socrate” di Bari, conferenza “Non c’è giustizia senza vita”
October 24 2016
New York Times

The Death Penalty, Nearing Its End
June 4 2016
The Washington Post

Meet the red-state conservatives fighting to abolish the death penalty
all press-related

VIDEO PHOTOS
4:04
Motion Grafic "cities for life" 2012 -
4:14
Motion Grafic cities for life FR -
3:01
Promo Engl 2013 citiesforlife -

72 visits

232 visits

49 visits

53 visits

61 visits
all the related media