Troy Davis Petition Denied

Today Judge William T. Moore, Jr., ruled that Troy Davis did not “clearly establish” his innocence at the hearing held in Savannah on June 23-24.  In a welcome development, Judge Moore did rule that it would be unconstitutional to execute an innocent person.

At the hearing, which was not a new trial, Troy Davis was still presumed guilty, and, with only witness recantations and no scientific evidence like DNA, he was unable to meet the very high standard set to prove his innocence.

The hearing did  not erase doubts about Troy Davis’ guilt; for example four witnesses testified under oath that they lied at Troy’s trial and others implicated the alternative suspect.

For the moment, Troy’s death sentence stands, but an appeal of this ruling is likely, and we will post more details as they emerge.

AIUSA welcomes a lively and courteous discussion that follow our Community Guidelines. Comments are not pre-screened before they post but AIUSA reserves the right to remove any comments violating our guidelines.

40 thoughts on “Troy Davis Petition Denied

  1. The system is f*cked. What is required is some moral courage here by the decision-makers. Innocence might not have been able to have been proven, but there is enough reasonable doubt now, that it will most certainly be unconstitutional to proceed and risk the murder of an innocent. This is SO frustrating and infuriating and disappointing. The constitutional protection of the individual needs to be reaffirmed strongly and deliberately as a priority. The status quo of a system which supports politicking in lieu of real justice, corruption, lazy and discriminatory policing does not. Grrrrr.

  2. This is idiocy! My prayers go out to you and your family, Troy, and to the MacPhail family, though they still want you dead for murder, but I pray for them anyway. :(

  3. So sad right now, where is the justice for Troy??? Like Debbie says Troy and his family are in my prayers, and so are the MacPhail family even though they dont seem to be bothered the wrong man may be murdered by the state of georgia! We wont give up the fight not now not ever….JUSTICE WILL WIN…eventually

  4. I'm so sorry to hear about this disappointing ruling. Troy, we are thinking of you and your family and friends. I know it must be so hard, but try to remember that a lot of people are wishing the best for you and hoping there will be light at the end of that long tunnel. I can't understand the barbaric notion that the state has the right to take a life under any circumstances no matter what. It dehumanizes us all. And it replaces justice with vengence. It is just not right. I hope that you will get the chance to prove your innocence in a new trial some day soon. Take care.

  5. Very tragic news indeed! I don't know why I am surprised, I guess I thought better of our justice system. For all who care let's keep fighting for Troy!
    I AM TROY!
    WE ARE TROY!

  6. although troy did not " clearly establish " his innocence in the eyes of this court and this judge, the system certainly certainly has not clearly established his guilt; quite the contrary, i think. another glaring example of the madness.

  7. Having attended the hearing, I strongly disagree with Judge Moore's assertion that "Mr. Davis' new evidence casts some additional, minimal doubt on his conviction" and that this evidence is "largely smoke and mirrors." Key witness recantations, including admissions to having lied under oath, combined with Benjamin Gordon's new eyewitness testimony claiming to have seen Sylvester "Redd" Coles shoot Officer MacPhail, qualified as more than just "minimal doubt" on Davis' guilt. And the doubt would've been stronger still if the Defense team had subpoenaed Coles, which would've made all hearsay evidence admissible. But rest assured that we can take solace that it is unconstitutional to execute an innocent person. I suppose we just had to wait until 2010 to make sure that was true.

  8. Many questions are still unresolved.
    Why for example did the defense not call Coles to testify? If he was not ready to admit his own guilt, he might have shed some light on what actually happened and why witnesses may have testified falsely.

    The judge's decision that the 8th amendment prohibits execution of the innocent is certainly a step forward and one hopes it will be affirmed by Supreme Court.

    I do not know whether Davis, or Coles, or anyone is innocent or guilty. What the case surely demonstrates is that the death penalty is not appropriate, for our criminal justice system, and perhaps any such system, is not capable of meeting its own standard of "beyond reasonable doubt."

  9. The system is f*cked. What is required is some moral courage here by the decision-makers. Innocence might not have been able to have been proven, but there is enough reasonable doubt now, that it will most certainly be unconstitutional to proceed and risk the murder of an innocent. This is SO frustrating and infuriating and disappointing. The constitutional protection of the individual needs to be reaffirmed strongly and deliberately as a priority. The status quo of a system which supports politicking in lieu of real justice, corruption, lazy and discriminatory policing does not. Grrrrr.

  10. This is idiocy! My prayers go out to you and your family, Troy, and to the MacPhail family, though they still want you dead for murder, but I pray for them anyway. :(

  11. So sad right now, where is the justice for Troy??? Like Debbie says Troy and his family are in my prayers, and so are the MacPhail family even though they dont seem to be bothered the wrong man may be murdered by the state of georgia! We wont give up the fight not now not ever….JUSTICE WILL WIN…eventually

  12. I’m so sorry to hear about this disappointing ruling. Troy, we are thinking of you and your family and friends. I know it must be so hard, but try to remember that a lot of people are wishing the best for you and hoping there will be light at the end of that long tunnel. I can’t understand the barbaric notion that the state has the right to take a life under any circumstances no matter what. It dehumanizes us all. And it replaces justice with vengence. It is just not right. I hope that you will get the chance to prove your innocence in a new trial some day soon. Take care.

  13. Very tragic news indeed! I don’t know why I am surprised, I guess I thought better of our justice system. For all who care let’s keep fighting for Troy!
    I AM TROY!
    WE ARE TROY!

  14. although troy did not ” clearly establish ” his innocence in the eyes of this court and this judge, the system certainly certainly has not clearly established his guilt; quite the contrary, i think. another glaring example of the madness.

  15. Having attended the hearing, I strongly disagree with Judge Moore’s assertion that “Mr. Davis’ new evidence casts some additional, minimal doubt on his conviction” and that this evidence is “largely smoke and mirrors.” Key witness recantations, including admissions to having lied under oath, combined with Benjamin Gordon’s new eyewitness testimony claiming to have seen Sylvester “Redd” Coles shoot Officer MacPhail, qualified as more than just “minimal doubt” on Davis’ guilt. And the doubt would’ve been stronger still if the Defense team had subpoenaed Coles, which would’ve made all hearsay evidence admissible. But rest assured that we can take solace that it is unconstitutional to execute an innocent person. I suppose we just had to wait until 2010 to make sure that was true.

  16. Many questions are still unresolved.
    Why for example did the defense not call Coles to testify? If he was not ready to admit his own guilt, he might have shed some light on what actually happened and why witnesses may have testified falsely.

    The judge’s decision that the 8th amendment prohibits execution of the innocent is certainly a step forward and one hopes it will be affirmed by Supreme Court.

    I do not know whether Davis, or Coles, or anyone is innocent or guilty. What the case surely demonstrates is that the death penalty is not appropriate, for our criminal justice system, and perhaps any such system, is not capable of meeting its own standard of “beyond reasonable doubt.”

  17. Is not there a second court that Troy can defend his case against? A more reliable system should allow for a one that judged to be guilty to have a second chance against another court (or judge)!

  18. Is not there a second court that Troy can defend his case against? A more reliable system should allow for a one that judged to be guilty to have a second chance against another court (or judge)!

  19. Those who are in control of the world decide if inmates should live or die, no matter what people do, they decide it. And when the inmate is not white, worse. Because those who are in control of the world are racists.

  20. Simply…blind justice, and not taking responsibility for travesty of justice. They want to keep him caged, they have to much to lose.

  21. It is soo frustrating to hear these stories!!!! Is this really happening in the U.S!!!!!!!

  22. Mr. Bassem,

    Yes, I believe there is one more appeal, probably to the Supreme Court. But it would be limited to legal issues only; the Supreme Court does not hear evidence.
    And I think there might be an appeal to the Governor of Georgia for commutation of the sentence.
    However, Mr. Davis had his best shot and lost. He is in a desperate situation now and frankly, it does not look good for him.

  23. Those who are in control of the world decide if inmates should live or die, no matter what people do, they decide it. And when the inmate is not white, worse. Because those who are in control of the world are racists.

  24. Simply…blind justice, and not taking responsibility for travesty of justice. They want to keep him caged, they have to much to lose.

  25. August 25, 2010 6:30 A.M.

    Bishop Walter Dixon’s of Atlanta, GA Prayer for Brother Troy Anthony Davis a Georgia Death Row Inmate Whom Bishop Dixon and Thousands of Others Believe Is Innocent.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBMGorVIZXQ

    For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through Him. (John 3:16, 17).

    Merciful Lord, who are the strength of sufferers and the comfort of those who are heavy of heart: incline thine ear, we beseech thee, to the prayers of all who cry unto thee in their troubles; trials, tribulation and distressed, uphold the fainting, relieve the suffering, console the sad, and make thy face to shine upon the family of our brother now in Christ Troy Davis who is an death row inmate. Lord it appears he maybe schedule for execution we know you have the final say.

    Therefore brother Troy Davis having been justified by faith, may you have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom you have obtained your introduction by faith into his grace in which you stand; and you exult in hope of the glory of God. And not only this, but you also exult in your tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about hope; and hope is proven character; and proven character, is faith; and faith does not disappoint because the love of God has been poured out within your heart through the Holy Spirit who was given to you

    You may sometimes be afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not despairing; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed, lied on, but knowing that He who raised the Lord Jesus will raise you also with Jesus and will present your mind, body and most important, your soul with him.
    Therefore you should never lose heart, but through your inner flesh is decaying yet your inner soul is being renewed day by day. For momentary, light affliction is producing for you an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, while you look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporally, but the things which are not seen are eternal (2.Corinthians 4:8,9,14 16-18).

    Doing your times of trials and tribulations we all have them, may your Lord Jesus Christ be near you to defend you, within you to refresh you, around you to preserve you, before you to guide you, behind you to justify you, above you to bless you. You shall lives and sound loudly with the Father and the Holy Ghost for all the remaining days of your life.

    Our Father, we thank you for being gracious to your child Troy Davis while he is here on earth for those who are Christian know him, according to Thy loving kindness and according to the greatness of Thy compassion. He continue to ask for your help in being a greater Christian worker on your battle field, Father he maybe perplexed and sometime maybe afraid while on his Christian journey. God if it is your will give this child of yours many extended years while he is with us here on earth through your “Grace”. God, send your most powerful angel to help your child and our brother Troy Davis as he lay his prayers and burden in your hands.

    This we ask in your son Jesus name
    Amen
    Bishop Walter Dixon
    bishopwldixon@yahoo.com
    404.849.2033
    P.O. Box 832161
    Stone Mountain, GA 30083
    Ps. I have posted a live video copy of this prayer in your honor on Google, Face Book, Media, MySpace, Twitter and Youtube.com for others to join in prayer.

  26. It is soo frustrating to hear these stories!!!! Is this really happening in the U.S!!!!!!!

  27. Mr. Bassem,

    Yes, I believe there is one more appeal, probably to the Supreme Court. But it would be limited to legal issues only; the Supreme Court does not hear evidence.
    And I think there might be an appeal to the Governor of Georgia for commutation of the sentence.
    However, Mr. Davis had his best shot and lost. He is in a desperate situation now and frankly, it does not look good for him.

  28. I imagine there are loads of individuals like me, who happen across varied solid blogs or web sites by chance. Your web log appears to possess a great community and a sound blogosphere presence. Its healthy to have absorbing and various perspectives on issues.

  29. This Judge should trade place's with troy. you can bet your bottom dollar he would see things as they should been seen, and not turn a blind eye to the injustice that was presented and stood before him. You Honour you day will come when you to will be judge, and I don't see good things for you either. God bless Troy, we will continue our fight against this incompetent and barbaric system of justice.

  30. This Judge should trade place’s with troy. you can bet your bottom dollar he would see things as they should been seen, and not turn a blind eye to the injustice that was presented and stood before him. You Honour you day will come when you to will be judge, and I don’t see good things for you either. God bless Troy, we will continue our fight against this incompetent and barbaric system of justice.

  31. The verdict could only have been a foregone conclusion given the court, unless overt rule change, procedure change could have been spoken out about by the judge. Otherwise, that was a ridiculous exercise, but, as the only chance, a necessary exercise, the only exercise. Can judges be very, very open to rule change wherever possible in an appeal? Or are we going to honour the ridiculousness often inherent in American court systems by going through with the appeal, it being ridiculous, but necessary as the only chance.

    —–

    Why was it ridiculous exercise (though of course a necessary exercise for Troy)?

    To say a burden of proof which is beyond reasonable doubt to "innocence" is "very high" is using the wrong term and so the meaning is all wrong. "Very high burden of proof" obscures that it is an absurd and even prima facie unjust requirement in itself. The words "very high" though can seem to lend the absurd, unjust requirement some validity – when it cannot be justly valid nor within human rights (for anyone in any case) to have such an absurd burden of proof.

    It's not "very high". It's nothing. It can't be taken seriously. It's unjust and against human rights.

    It can never be right to force a person who happened to be near a scene to establish innocence beyond reasonable doubt.

    The plain fact of earthly life is that, for every crime in every place in the world, there are going to a lot of people who are unable to prove that they are innocent of it. For every crime, "the law" could sentence and imprison five or fifty people separately for the one offence, because none of them could prove their innocence beyond reasonable doubt.

    —–

    “This was their chance,” Beth Attaway Burton, senior assistant attorney general, told U.S. District Judge William T. Moore Jr. about the legal workers representing Mr. Davis.

    “Their standard is extremely high. They have not met it.” Indeed, the standard for the rare hearing is extremely high. Instead of just having to prove that the case against Davis was flawed, his team has to prove his innocence.”

    What is clear of this? The State are telling the deciding part of the court that, by the terms of the legal procedures, it is correct that Mr. Davis is killed. Simultaneously The State can only be making plain to the decision maker that these terms are absurd and ridiculous. And that absurd and ridiculous is the "only chance", the only option available.

    To “prove” innocence against an improper, but fully state backed police and prosecutor inquiry is very, very hard indeed at the best of times – but when the natural, true means to do so are disqualified from court by the procedural rules of pen-pushers, is infeasible even in theory.

    Time after time after time after time, US courts procedural dictates show that absurd rules which do not allow themselves to be applied as relevantly for individual cases (as each case is and only that) are worshipped above
    human life and human rights, human freedom and especially the right not to be wrongly murdered and / or imprisoned.

    Should Mr. Davis’s case not be taken as utterly seriously as it requires to be, by court procedures which make truth into a game of wrongness, if I were someone like Mr. Davis, a most extreme victim of torture, I would prefer not to live. Why would I wish to live in such a world? Whole nations’ governments and the representative ruling power of nearly a whole continent of the world (Europe) has denounced the now standing verdict against Mr. Davis as unacceptable and not feasible legally. Will absurd requirements of US courts be overriding?

    (Quote source: http://www.bvblackspin.com/2010/06/25/ga-hearing-

  32. The verdict could only have been a foregone conclusion given the court, unless overt rule change, procedure change could have been spoken out about by the judge. Otherwise, that was a ridiculous exercise, but, as the only chance, a necessary exercise, the only exercise. Can judges be very, very open to rule change wherever possible in an appeal? Or are we going to honour the ridiculousness often inherent in American court systems by going through with the appeal, it being ridiculous, but necessary as the only chance.

    —–

    Why was it ridiculous exercise (though of course a necessary exercise for Troy)?

    To say a burden of proof which is beyond reasonable doubt to "innocence" is "very high" is using the wrong term and so the meaning is all wrong. "Very high burden of proof" obscures that it is an absurd and even prima facie unjust requirement in itself. The words "very high" though can seem to lend the absurd, unjust requirement some validity – when it cannot be justly valid nor within human rights (for anyone in any case) to have such an absurd burden of proof.

    It's not "very high". It's nothing. It can't be taken seriously. It's unjust and against human rights.

    It can never be right to force a person who happened to be near a scene to establish innocence beyond reasonable doubt.

    The plain fact of earthly life is that, for every crime in every place in the world, there are going to a lot of people who are unable to prove that they are innocent of it. For every crime, "the law" could sentence and imprison five or fifty people separately for the one offence, because none of them could prove their innocence beyond reasonable doubt.

    —–

    “This was their chance,” Beth Attaway Burton, senior assistant attorney general, told U.S. District Judge William T. Moore Jr. about the legal workers representing Mr. Davis.

    “Their standard is extremely high. They have not met it.” Indeed, the standard for the rare hearing is extremely high. Instead of just having to prove that the case against Davis was flawed, his team has to prove his innocence.”

    What is clear of this? The State are telling the deciding part of the court that, by the terms of the legal procedures, it is correct that Mr. Davis is killed. Simultaneously The State can only be making plain to the decision maker that these terms are absurd and ridiculous. And that absurd and ridiculous is the "only chance", the only option available.

    To “prove” innocence against an improper, but fully state backed police and prosecutor inquiry is very, very hard indeed at the best of times – but when the natural, true means to do so are disqualified from court by the procedural rules of pen-pushers, is infeasible even in theory.

    Time after time after time after time, US courts procedural dictates show that absurd rules which do not allow themselves to be applied as relevantly for individual cases (as each case is and only that) are worshipped above
    human life and human rights, human freedom and especially the right not to be wrongly murdered and / or imprisoned.

    Should Mr. Davis’s case not be taken as utterly seriously as it requires to be, by court procedures which make truth into a game of wrongness, if I were someone like Mr. Davis, a most extreme victim of torture, I would prefer not to live. Why would I wish to live in such a world? Whole nations’ governments and the representative ruling power of nearly a whole continent of the world (Europe) has denounced the now standing verdict against Mr. Davis as unacceptable and not feasible legally. Will absurd requirements of US courts be overriding?

    (Quote source: http://www.bvblackspin.com/2010/06/25/ga-hearing-

  33. The verdict could only have been a foregone conclusion given the court, unless overt rule change, procedure change could have been spoken out about by the judge. Otherwise, that was a ridiculous exercise, but, as the only chance, a necessary exercise, the only exercise. Can judges be very, very open to rule change wherever possible in an appeal? Or are we going to honour the ridiculousness often inherent in American court systems by going through with the appeal, it being ridiculous, but necessary as the only chance.

    —–

    Why was it ridiculous exercise (though of course a necessary exercise for Troy)?

    To say a burden of proof which is beyond reasonable doubt to "innocence" is "very high" is using the wrong term and so the meaning is all wrong. "Very high burden of proof" obscures that it is an absurd and even prima facie unjust requirement in itself. The words "very high" though can seem to lend the absurd, unjust requirement some validity – when it cannot be justly valid nor within human rights (for anyone in any case) to have such an absurd burden of proof.

    It's not "very high". It's nothing. It can't be taken seriously. It's unjust and against human rights.

    It can never be right to force a person who happened to be near a scene to establish innocence beyond reasonable doubt.

    The plain fact of earthly life is that, for every crime in every place in the world, there are going to a lot of people who are unable to prove that they are innocent of it. For every crime, "the law" could sentence and imprison five or fifty people separately for the one offence, because none of them could prove their innocence beyond reasonable doubt.

    —–

    “This was their chance,” Beth Attaway Burton, senior assistant attorney general, told U.S. District Judge William T. Moore Jr. about the legal workers representing Mr. Davis.

    “Their standard is extremely high. They have not met it.” Indeed, the standard for the rare hearing is extremely high. Instead of just having to prove that the case against Davis was flawed, his team has to prove his innocence.”

    What is clear of this? The State are telling the deciding part of the court that, by the terms of the legal procedures, it is correct that Mr. Davis is killed. Simultaneously The State can only be making plain to the decision maker that these terms are absurd and ridiculous. And that absurd and ridiculous is the "only chance", the only option available.

    To “prove” innocence against an improper, but fully state backed police and prosecutor inquiry is very, very hard indeed at the best of times – but when the natural, true means to do so are disqualified from court by the procedural rules of pen-pushers, is infeasible even in theory.

    Time after time after time after time, US courts procedural dictates show that absurd rules which do not allow themselves to be applied as relevantly for individual cases (as each case is and only that) are worshipped above
    human life and human rights, human freedom and especially the right not to be wrongly murdered and / or imprisoned.

    Should Mr. Davis’s case not be taken as utterly seriously as it requires to be, by court procedures which make truth into a game of wrongness, if I were someone like Mr. Davis, a most extreme victim of torture, I would prefer not to live. Why would I wish to live in such a world? Whole nations’ governments and the representative ruling power of nearly a whole continent of the world (Europe) has denounced the now standing verdict against Mr. Davis as unacceptable and not feasible legally. Will absurd requirements of US courts be overriding?

    (Quote source: http://www.bvblackspin.com/2010/06/25/ga-hearing-

  34. The verdict could only have been a foregone conclusion given the court, unless overt rule change, procedure change could have been spoken out about by the judge. Otherwise, that was a ridiculous exercise, but, as the only chance, a necessary exercise, the only exercise. Can judges be very, very open to rule change wherever possible in an appeal? Or are we going to honour the ridiculousness often inherent in American court systems by going through with the appeal, it being ridiculous, but necessary as the only chance.

    —–

    Why was it ridiculous exercise (though of course a necessary exercise for Troy)?

    To say a burden of proof which is beyond reasonable doubt to “innocence” is “very high” is using the wrong term and so the meaning is all wrong. “Very high burden of proof” obscures that it is an absurd and even prima facie unjust requirement in itself. The words “very high” though can seem to lend the absurd, unjust requirement some validity – when it cannot be justly valid nor within human rights (for anyone in any case) to have such an absurd burden of proof.

    It’s not “very high”. It’s nothing. It can’t be taken seriously. It’s unjust and against human rights.

    It can never be right to force a person who happened to be near a scene to establish innocence beyond reasonable doubt.

    The plain fact of earthly life is that, for every crime in every place in the world, there are going to a lot of people who are unable to prove that they are innocent of it. For every crime, “the law” could sentence and imprison five or fifty people separately for the one offence, because none of them could prove their innocence beyond reasonable doubt.

    —–

    “This was their chance,” Beth Attaway Burton, senior assistant attorney general, told U.S. District Judge William T. Moore Jr. about the legal workers representing Mr. Davis.

    “Their standard is extremely high. They have not met it.” Indeed, the standard for the rare hearing is extremely high. Instead of just having to prove that the case against Davis was flawed, his team has to prove his innocence.”

    What is clear of this? The State are telling the deciding part of the court that, by the terms of the legal procedures, it is correct that Mr. Davis is killed. Simultaneously The State can only be making plain to the decision maker that these terms are absurd and ridiculous. And that absurd and ridiculous is the “only chance”, the only option available.

    To “prove” innocence against an improper, but fully state backed police and prosecutor inquiry is very, very hard indeed at the best of times – but when the natural, true means to do so are disqualified from court by the procedural rules of pen-pushers, is infeasible even in theory.

    Time after time after time after time, US courts procedural dictates show that absurd rules which do not allow themselves to be applied as relevantly for individual cases (as each case is and only that) are worshipped above
    human life and human rights, human freedom and especially the right not to be wrongly murdered and / or imprisoned.

    Should Mr. Davis’s case not be taken as utterly seriously as it requires to be, by court procedures which make truth into a game of wrongness, if I were someone like Mr. Davis, a most extreme victim of torture, I would prefer not to live. Why would I wish to live in such a world? Whole nations’ governments and the representative ruling power of nearly a whole continent of the world (Europe) has denounced the now standing verdict against Mr. Davis as unacceptable and not feasible legally. Will absurd requirements of US courts be overriding?

    (Quote source: http://www.bvblackspin.com/2010/06/25/ga-hearing-for-troy-davis-closes-on-second-day)