Troy Davis Executed
Read Time:5 Minute, 25 Second
Troy Davis executed in
Georgia at 8:17 p.m. EST
The Supreme Court stayed Davis’ execution a scant three hours before his execution.
Georgia inmate Troy Davis has been executed for the killing of an off-duty police officer in a case that has drawn worldwide support over his claims of innocence. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles rejection for clemency. The officer’s family says they finally have justice after 22 years.
After a last minute reprieve, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a last-minute stay of execution. A Georgia Department of Corrections Official reported that Davis died at 11:08 p.m. Eyewitnesses described the mood in the execution chamber as “somber” as Davis declared his innocence a final time and relatives of his alleged murder victim looked on.
The execution was delayed more than four hours as the U.S. Supreme Court weighed last-minute arguments from Davis’ legal team and over whether his execution should be blocked. The court’s decision to deny the stay came without comment after 10 p.m. ET.
At 7:05 p.m. ET, five minutes after his scheduled death, Davis’ supporters erupted in cheers, hugs and tears outside the jail in Jackson, Georgia, as supporters believed Davis had been saved from the death penalty. But Davis was granted only a temporary reprieve as the Supreme Court considered the decision. Davis was convicted of the 1989 murder of off-duty policeman Mark MacPhail, and had his execution stayed four times over the course of his 22 years on death row, but multiple legal appeals during that time failed to prove his innocence, despite “too much doubt” as to whether he shot the officer.
At least 13 Howard University students were arrested for failing to move off the White House sidewalk, according to ABC News affiliate WJLA. The protest there was expected to last until 7 p.m.
CNN posted the following timeline leading up to the execution:
After 10 p.m. ET, the Supreme Court, in a brief order, rejected Davis’ request. His supporters had sought to prevent the execution, saying seven of the nine witnesses against him have recanted or contradicted their testimony.
Below are the developments as they happened as published by CNN.
[Updated at 11:12 p.m.] Davis has been executed, a prison representative has said. The time of death was 11:08 p.m. ET.
[Updated at 10:55 p.m.] Davis’ execution is expected to begin between 11:05 to 11:10 p.m. ET, the Georgia Department of Corrections says.
[Updated at 10:36 p.m.] People who’d been protesting for hours across the street from the prison where Davis will be executed are chanting, “We are Troy Davis,” CNN’s David Mattingly reported.
[Updated at 10:21 p.m.] The U.S. Supreme Court has denied Davis’ motion for a stay of execution.
Word of the Supreme Court’s decision comes more than three hours after Davis was scheduled to be executed, and more than four hours after Davis’ attorneys had filed the motion.
With the ruling, Georgia is expected to proceed with Davis’ execution.
[Updated at 10:07 p.m.] The daylong gathering across the street from the prison by Davis’ supporters has turned into a candlelight vigil, CNN’s Gustavo Valdes reports. Hundreds still are waiting for a resolution. Some are praying, and some others are singing.
[Updated at 9:41 p.m.] The Rev. Raphael Warnock said he was standing with Davis’ relatives on the grounds of the prison when they heard the execution wouldn’t happen at the scheduled time.
“I was standing with the family at about 7 p.m. By that time, of course, naturally, we were expecting the worst,” Warnock, a pastor to Davis’ family, told CNN’s Piers Morgan. “Suddenly we began to hear cheers from the crowd across the way, and the word came that the execution had been delayed.
“Certainly we’re glad that Troy Davis is still alive, but we are still witnessing, in my estimation, a civil right violation and a human rights violation in the worst way unfold before our very eyes. This is Troy Davis’ fourth execution date. I’m glad that he’s alive, but that in and of itself is cruel and unusual punishment. America can do much better than this.”
Asked if Davis had had what would have been offered as a last meal, Warnock indicated that Davis might have skipped it.
“I do know that on the last time he received an execution warrant, he refused his last meal,” Warnock said. “I spoke earlier tonight with his nephew … and he said his uncle would refuse his last meal again today. He has continued to insist that this is not his last meal. I must say to you that he evinces a faith that is just amazing, even to me as his pastor.”
[Updated at 9:05 p.m.] The number of police officers standing outside the Georgia prison housing Davis has risen to more than 100, CNN’s David Mattingly reported. The officers are watching protesters, who’ve been across the street for hours.
The crowd has been orderly, Mattingly said. While it had been chanting for much of the day, they’re “probably as quiet as I’ve heard them all night,” Mattingly reported.
[Updated at 8:55 p.m.] Dozens of people have gathered outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., in support of Davis, footage from CNN affiliate WJLA shows.
Still no ruling from the court on Davis’ request for a stay of execution.
[Updated at 8:39 p.m.] This video report from CNN’s David Mattingly, made about 40 minutes ago, shows the people who’ve been protesting across the street from the prison where Davis is being held, and the police officers in riot gear who are in front of the prison, watching the protesters.
Wendy Gozen Brown, a spokeswoman for Amnesty International, said In this type of situation, there’s always the potential for it to go awry, with certain groups, angry rhetoric. But Troy Davis would want people to keep fighting peacefully, for him and for, as he would put it, all of the other Troy Davises out there.
A Georgia board of pardons and paroles rejected Davis’s plea for clemency on Tuesday. The Supreme Court upheld the ruling after only three hours.
Mad Mike’s America thanks ABC News and CNN.
What does Davis’ execution imply about the American justice system?
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
Bill your response could have been a post. As I have stated time and again I am opposed to the death penalty, and I agree with you as regards the failings of our justice system. The fact is we have what we have, and, as you know, it’s been around for centuries, having been based on English common law. That being said I don’t see it changing any time in the next 100 years or so. As a result we have to work within it, as distasteful as that is sometime.
Troy Davis should not have been made an exception simply because he was black and a few witnesses could no longer recall what happened 21 years ago. That information, blown way out of proportion by the media, gave the impression that Davis was a victim, while his real victim, the slain police officer, is forgotten.
The justice system did its job. None can argue that Davis didn’t have his day in court. On the contrary he got a lot more than most condemned, given that his defense was funded by some very wealthy and influential people, not to mention various anti-death penalty organizations. That notwithstanding the evidence was clear:
Davis killed a cop, proven beyond all reasonable doubt, and for that his sentence, regardless of how we feel about it, was carried out. I feel sadness only because of the barbarity of the act and the fact that Davis’ punishment is now over. Life in prison is both more humane and suited to his crime. Perhaps now the family of the murdered officer can find peace.
Mike you are correct. That he was proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt at that time to those 12 people is accurate also. Whether that is still true may now be questionable or whether a different 12 people would have saw it differently is also questionable. That is just one problem with this particular case. The death penalty in general is a barbaric practice of an uncivilized society.
What was it deToqueville said about societies and the way they treat their offenders? Something about society can be judged by how they treat them? I suspect he was talking mainly about incarceration but to me the death penalty speaks volumes about the God fearing, gun lovers who seem to exercise so much control over our politicians.
As a footnote: you and I both know how incredibly unreliable eyewitness testimony is to begin with. While it’s not given as much weight as it once had the fact that a witness literally points to a defendant in court has a huge emotional impact on a jury. That alone should be suspect.
Very well said my friend.
A person’s life is in the hand of twelve people who were not bright enough to get off jury duty. That’s an unfortunate truth. Did you know “The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law, does not require employers to pay employees for jury duty service”?
As a result, even many law firms do not pay their employees while they are on jury duty. That’s a federal law that needs to be overturned immediately (well, in my dreams…)
Like Mike, I wish you’d written this as a post, lazersedge. If there were ever a clear, cogent argument against the death penalty, you have made an excellent, inarguable case against it. Like Mike, I wish your comment had been a post. (Perhaps it still could be…? Please?)
Why Davis garnered so much support is nagging at me as to his possible innocence. Nevertheless, whether we subject Davis or a loathsome white supremacist to a lethal injection is irrelevant. The death penalty is barbaric and needs to be outlawed.
Although proponents of the death penalty will argue that capital punishment deters crime, I have yet to see one statistic to prove that assertion.
Thurgood Marshall, LLB, late Justice of the US Supreme Court, in a June 29, 1972 Furman v. Georgia concurrent opinion, stated:
It is generally agreed between the retentionists and abolitionists, whatever their opinions about the validity of comparative studies of deterrence, that the data which now exist show no correlation between the existence of capital punishment and lower rates of capital crime.
Despite the fact that abolitionists have not proved non-deterrence beyond a reasonable doubt, they have succeeded in showing by clear and convincing evidence that capital punishment is not necessary as a deterrent to crime in our society.
In light of the massive amount of evidence before us, I see no alternative but to conclude that capital punishment cannot be justified on the basis of its deterrent effect.
Well said Dorothy. Well said indeed! I love that we can enjoy the thoughts and opinions of others without being toffee nosed about it.
A sad day.
People paying attention to this story this evening will be saying to themselves this evening, “He got what he deserved.”, or, “Was this the right thing to do.” In either case they are asking the wrong question. The question that every American should be asking is should the government be killing its own citizens under any circumstances. A number of folks will immediately say yes without actually thinking about their response. Two years ago the Tea Party and Sarah Palin were screaming about “death panels” being used by the government. Others have lamented in the past that killers do not deserve to live. Again, they are not thinking about the real issues regarding when does the government have the right to kill its citizens. In the last twenty two years I have worked on more 50 capital murder cases with defense attorneys and have, therefore, been in close contact with more than 50 people faced with being sentenced to death. During those years I have stood beside four defendants as they were told that the state was going to kill them. I will not profess their innocence because in their trials 12 people made the decision that they were guilty of that crime and the same 12 recommend that they be put to death. I will say that their guilt was not to an absolute certainty, a capital crime under the definitions used by the State of Alabama. I will only say that those twelve people believe that they those standards were met. Twelve different people might have saw it differently. That is something that most people do not understand.
Prior to trial process there is an initial unfairness in our current system which is based on the quality of legal representation which is based upon the amount of money defendants have available for legal counsel. The vast majority of criminal defendants are represented by public defenders and/or appointed counsel who have limited resources on which they can depend. Most of them do the best they can but without the resources of investigators or experts such as the state has at its disposal it is hardly a fair adversarial process. In Alabama attorneys in capital cases are generally allowed one investigator and one mitigation specialist and in some cases a mental heath expert. That pales in the face of the resources of the office of a District Attorney and its investigators, the law enforcement agencies and their investigators, lab technicians, and crime scene experts, and the state crime lab experts. So, even at the time when the defendant is considered an innocent person, the scales of justice are already tilted away from the accused. Then, at best the defendant’s fate rests with the luck of the draw as far as juror selection is concerned. In a typical capital case, even in a small county there may be as many as two hundred people called for jury duty. At the outset there will be people who will have various excuse for why they should not be compelled to be on the jury. Some for work related reasons, some for family hardship reasons, and some for health reasons. It is in the sole discretion of the judge as to who stays and who goes home. Then any potential jurors who know the defendant, attorneys, witnesses, law enforcement officers, or other justice system officials may be dismissed at the discretion of the judge. After that jurors are questioned about their opinions about various things including law enforcement, crime and criminals, and the death penalty. Anyone who is morally opposed to the death penalty under any circumstances are removed under something called “death qualifying” the jury. Similarly jurors must be willing to consider mitigating details before recommending death if the accused is convicted. This is a daunting process for the attorneys and only the most experienced have any chance of doing a creditable job at jury selection. Even that, however, is affected by which jurors are left to select from once all of the various dismissals have taken place. There is a somewhat morbid joke among attorneys that “a person’s life is in the hand of twelve people who were not bright enough to get off jury duty.” While I do not mean to disparage those who see jury duty as their civic responsibility and do the best they can do, often times juries are not the best and the brightest that society has to offer. The defendant is then left to be judged by twelve people who do not know him or her but may have been known by the judge and gotten a favorable dismissal ruling, especially in the smaller, more rural counties. With the final selection process to get down to the final twelve it is, more or less, a crap shoot as to ends up on the jury. Most studies of scientific jury process indicate that at best they can impact the decision process no more than 10% of the time. After that, it is left to the skill of the attorneys and their decisions and the effect on those jurors that may impact on the life of the defendant.
These are a few of the things that, all else being equal, contribute to the uncertainty to a capital murder trial. In my mind, this alone should disqualify any trial from being used to determine if a state could kill someone or not. Just the luck of the draw, and not necessarily just the evidence.
Thank you, Laser. As a lay person, I find your comments very enlightening.
Many years ago, I was removed from a jury panel for a capital murder trial here in Los Angeles when the prosecutor found out that I am morally opposed to the death penalty. Arrogant as it may sound, I was disappointed that I would not be one of the people hearing the case–not because I planned to sabotage the outcome to spare the defendant’s life, but because I intended to put every bit of my rational capabilities into arriving at a fair decision, even if it weighed heavily on my conscience.
I have no idea whether the defendant in that case was innocent or guilty because I was transferred to a civil court and didn’t hear anything about the outcome of the murder trial, which was not a high-profile case (as I recall, the defendant was accused of killing a drug dealer).
So many factors involved in the administration of justice…
I’m finally with you 100%…