Posted on 09/21/2011 10:36:43 AM PDT by Niuhuru
Georgia inmate Troy Davis's last-ditch request for a lie detector test to try to prove his innocence ahead of tonight's planned execution has been denied by Georgia Department of Corrections.
Defence lawyer Stephen Marsh said he had hoped the polygraph would convince the state pardons board to reconsider a decision against clemency, which was rejected yesterday.
Davis, 42, is scheduled to die at 7pm tonight. It is the fourth time in four years that Davis' execution has been scheduled by Georgia officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
He isn’t innocent. The racist left has intimidated some of the witnesses and jurors into changing their stories. That’s what the cops should be investigating.
He was being pursued for shooting him in the face not hitting him with the gun. How else would the prosecutor be able to have the ballistics expert testify that the bullet casing from the pool party shooting matched the bullet casing at the shooting of the police officer. Why would anyone have a motive to shoot this police officer other than the perpetrator he was hotly pursuing.
Physical evidence is helpful in gaining a conviction but a jury can always use deductive logic as to motive and opportunity to reach a beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
Anyone trying to decide this case from media reports interposed by the defendant’s supporters is on a fool’s mission.The jury made the decision and 4 separate appeals courts upheld it.
Although the murder weapon was not recovered, ballistic evidence presented at trial tied bullets recovered at or near the scene to those at another shooting in which Davis was also charged. Davis was convicted of murder and various lesser charges, including the earlier shooting, and was sentenced to death in August 1991.
The polygraph is easily fooled by sociopaths.
I guess you haven't heard about what happened to Boob Barf after he lost his Congressional seat. He went off the deep end, started associating all sorts of liberal causes (even going to an Al Gore event to "raise awareness" of global warming) and did everything he could to trash conservative Republicans and overturn all the good thing he support in Congress like the Defense of Marriage act.
Today's Bob Barr has virtually NOTHING in common with the common sense conservative Bob Barr that served in Congress (I guess they both strongly support gun rights, that's about it). Bob Barr today IS sympathetic to cop-killers (not to mention terrorists), and is a paid ACLU consultant.
The polygraph is easily fooled by most people. It’s a worthless, subjective, useless tool used by those who want the truth, yet settle for “maybe”. It is also not allowed as evidence in a court case.
I passed one. That’s how good it is.
The polygraph is easily fooled by most people. It’s a worthless, subjective, useless tool used by those who want the truth, yet settle for “maybe”. It is also not allowed as evidence in a court case.
I passed one. That’s how good it is.
Sorry about the double post. My new computer sucks.
“I understand that both former Rep Bob Barr and former FBI Director William Sessions have serious doubts about this one. I trust both men to be level headed and in no way sympathetic to cop-killers”
From Wilkepedia
“Edgar Smith (born 1934) is an American convicted murderer, who was once on Death Row for the 1957 murder of fifteen-year-old honor student and cheer leader Victoria Ann Zielinski. Vigorously contesting his conviction through the courts and in the media, Smith became a celebrity, and his case was argued in public most notably by William F. Buckley, Jr. He eventually succeeded in winning a retrial and negotiating a reduced sentence. Smith was released only to be incarcerated for a second time for the kidnapping and attempted murder of Lefteriya Ozbun in 1976.”
Need I say more.
He is a very bad dude and should have been off the streets long before this series of crimes. And I frankly think that is what the jury was thinking.
No, the officer was pursuing him for hitting a guy in the face with a gun at the Burger King parking lot. The guy being pursued just happened to have shot someone in the face earlier in the evening in an apparently unrelated incident, but the officer who died (McPhail) was off duty and I didn’t see any evidence that he had somehow made a connection between this incident and the earlier shooting, which he may not have even known about, since he was off duty.
The defendant in this case may have shot the officer because he knew he had shot someone earlier and he didn’t want to go to jail for that crime, but the officer who was shot was pursuing him for a different reason.
Perhaps a bit more like, just perhaps, how your comments about Buckley relate to the present matter.
They relate to your comment that Barr and Sessions who you perceive as conservative law enforcement supporters believe in Davis’ innocence and therefore the case should be scrutinized. William Buckley, a very conservative icon, also promoted the innocence of Smith but that does not necessarily mean that Smith was railroaded. In fact after he was released and caught a second time brutalizing a woman, he admitted that he had been guilty of the first incident in which he was sentenced to death. The only issue that matters is the evidence not a “celebrated” outsiders opinion of that evidence, whomever they may be.
So, if I understand your logic, the story of the Titanic would be a convincing argument against sailing on ships. One case that didn’t work out speaks against all others.
No your initial comment did not cite any facts just what the opinion of a few celebrities was. it is my argument that you do not decide a case by taking a poll of celebrities who may have an opinion, whether they be liberal or conservative.His guilt or innocence is determined exclusively by the facts of the case not what some celebrated individual may think about the case. Quite honestly, it would not enter into my equation as to what Sessions, Buckley, Barr or Kim Kardashian thought about the viability of the Titantic. Nor should it make any difference as to what they thought about this person’s guilt ot innocence. If it did, we would not need appellate courts or engineers. We could just take a vote by public opinion as to guilt or innocence or whether the ship will float.
I’m for the death penalty, but I’m also for fair trials and compelling evidence. If we’re going to put someone to death, we ought to make certain that he committed the crime. This perp has offered to take a lie-detector test, but state officials refuse to let him. Also, certain witnesses have recanted their testimony. There is even a case where someone else is said to have admitted to the shooting.
Also, my post pointed out muir_redwood’s percception of Barr as a conservative law enforcement supporter is wrong.
The Bob Barr of the 1990s was “level-headed” and was in no way sympathetic to cop-killers.
The Bob Barr of 2011 is NOT, he’s a liberal kook who supports the ACLU. A quick glance at all the columns he’s written in the last couple years shows this guy goes out of his way to defend scumbags. This year, Barr even traveled to Haiti to lobby on behalf of genocidal dictator “Baby Doc” Duvalier.” (according to Barr, “he is not serving as Duvalier’s attorney, but is in Port-au-Prince to consult, assist and be Duvalier’s voice to the international community.”) If Barr is supporting Troy Davis, it’s more likely the SOB should have been executed a long time ago.
Bob Barr of 1998 would have nothing but contempt for his 2011 counterpart.
If your point was that we don’t decide cases by the opinions of others; only the facts in evidence, then the use of an unrelated case as an example supposedly showing the validity of the process in this case is thoroughly illogical.
At the risk of belaboring the point. I simply cited the Buckley-Smith example solely to illustrate and dispel your notion that because a conservative (although I do not consider wingnut Barr or the disgraced ethics challenged incompetent FBI Director Sessions who was fired by Clinton conservative) has an opinion, that opinion may be no better than any other man on the street.At best, it is a fifty fifty proposition and belongs nowhere in a consideration of the facts or evidence. Just the facts, ma’am.
I don’t put any stock in polygraphs, nervous innocent people can fail them and guilty people can pass them. I’d recommend the “Penn and Teller BS” episode on the subject.
I haven’t read up on the details. I hope this guy was guilty.
Some are unhappy that jurors nowadays want to be sure beyond any doubt rather than “reasonable” doubt but I don’t know if I could vote to convict someone unless I was positive they did it.
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.