Posted on 09/21/2011 10:49:14 PM PDT by sthguard
Ann Coulter's excellent column on the Troy Davis brouhaha mentioned that there were 34 witnesses, not 9 like the Left keeps insisting. Has anyone come across legal documents to back up that number?
He used the same gun and ammunition to shoot someone else with 100% certainty that didn’t die, then you have some witnesses saying he might not have been the one using the same gun an ammunition to kill with.
I think even without any witnesses this guy would have been convicted.
He had a fair trial, that is our justice system. When you get convicted of a capital offense, you have a huge ability to continue appeals.
Yes, I’m familiar with the basic details of the case, and I don’t think any sane person actually doubts the accuracy of the rulings. I’m just looking for more evidence to counter the MSM talking points.
Thank you!
I would add that no judge, in 22 years, including the SCOTUS today, has sided with Davis. SCOTUS was 9-0.
The culprit and the witnesses that fingered him were of the same race too. Studies harking back long ago show that it’s much easier for a person to reliably identify another person of the same race, than to reliably identify another person of a different race. The case didn’t hang (no pun intended) solely or even mostly on the testimony of white people, which had that been the case would have been an ethical problem.
It was in the 170+ page federal reexamination brief that prosecutors submitted in support of his sentence ...
For pages 1-62:
http://www.gasd.uscourts.gov/pdf/409cv00130_92part1.pdf
For pages 63-174:
http://www.gasd.uscourts.gov/pdf/409cv00130_92part2.pdf
The new capital crime should be that it took 22 years to carry out the sentence.
Haven’t you learned by now never to doubt ANN on the facts? HAW
JC
But how many of the 34 were eye witnesses to the crime? I would take the 7 of 9 to mean 7 of the 9 crime scene witnesses.
9-0 including the wise latina?
All 34.
I really think it is telling that SCOTUS voted 9-0. When you can’t get Ginsburg to vote against the death penalty, I don’t have to see the evidence to know it’s there. I also thought it was telling that his last words were something like, “I didn’t have a gun.” Not, I didn’t kill the guy; not, I am innocent; not any sort of direct denial. Even in death he was cheating the truth by avoiding the major issue: Was he involved in the death. If he was involved, I’m not sad he was executed; and I think there is no real doubt that he was involved.
I don’t think so - there were 34 prosecution witnesses total. That included various people who weren’t eye witnesses to the crime, like prison informants, and witnesses to the earlier shooting. There weren’t 34 people who saw the shooting at burger king.
Oh good Lord liberals are such lying scum. Thank you for posting this opinion. I read through a dozen of the eye witness accounts and they were very consistent. I’m sure any “recanting” came from the fog of time mixed with the popular pressure of the case. Half of Savannah apparently saw this shooting and the facts of the case are hardly in dispute. Like I said earlier, if Ginsberg of the SCOTUS voted to not hear his appeal or to uphold this 170+ page ruling you KNOW he is guilty as hell. Lying liberal POS press.
Actually, he did.
His last words were: 'I'd like to address the MacPhail family. Let you know, despite the situation you are in, I'm not the one who personally killed your son, your father, your brother. I am innocent.' Just a few feet away behind a glass window, MacPhail's son and brother watched in silence. Davis, who refused a last meal, added: 'The incident that happened that night is not my fault. I did not have a gun. All I can ask ... is that you look deeper into this case so that you really can finally see the truth.' Davis then asked his family and friends 'to continue to fight this fight.' He said: 'For those about to take my life, God have mercy on your souls. And may God bless your souls.'
I'm not defending the guy, just setting the record straight on what he said.
A pair of the perp’s bloody pants found in his mother’s home were found inadmissible because the perp’s mother claimed she didn’t give “permission” for the police to enter her home. The perp’s ammo matched the same ammo used to shoot another victim earlier that same day. The perp is no angel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.