A Grievous Injustice

The State of Georgia is about to execute a man convicted on the basis of eyewitness testimony that has, almost in its entirety, been retracted. There was no physical evidence against him. A former US president, a former FBI Director, a beavy of unpaid legal experts, and a group of former wardens who have all carried out death penalties, have all called for Georgia to stop the execution. But it has refused – even though another man has confessed to the murder, and even though that man was one of the eyewitnesses who put Troy Davis on Death Row. Constrained by law to decide based on narrow legal grounds that have nothing to do with the now recanted eyewitness testimony, the US Supreme Court refused to stay the execution. And as I write this, we are moments away from what appears to be the most unjust US execution of modern times.

Troy Anthony Davis

Originally published at 10:31 pm CDT on 9-21-11.

 

Troy Davis is now dead.

The State of Georgia killed him moments ago as punishment for a crime – a cop killing – he almost certainly did not commit.

Davis's case has been in the news for weeks, and he has attracted a large number of supporters from former US President Jimmy Carter, former FBI Director William Sessions, a bevy of unpaid legal experts, and a group of former wardens who have all carried out death penalties – including the warden who once headed the prison where Troy Anthony Davis now awaits death.

Davis is the quintessential example of a case where execution should be stopped.

Seven of the nine eyewitnesses against Davis have recanted their testimony. Some of them say police coerced the false testimony that put Davis on death row.

The one piece of physical evidence against Davis was ballistic evidence that was subsequently discredited.

Three of the jurors who convicted Davis now say they would never have voted for the death penalty if the court had told them the ballistic evidence was no good, and they certainly would not do so now after so many of the eyewitnesses have publicly recanted.

Drunk, another man confessed to the murder. That man was one of the eyewitnesses who put Troy Davis on Death Row, and he was a main suspect as police first investigated. 

Even Bob Barr, a former Republican US congressman from Georgia and an attorney who did work for Sholom Rubashkin's defense, asked for this execution to be halted.

Troy Davis was poor and he's black and he got a substandard defense as a result. His lawyers lacked the money to put on a good defense. He didn't have a legal team approaching double digits culled from the top attorneys in the country.

Davis has always maintained his innocence and his story has not changed at all in the more than 20 years this horrible process has gone on.

Unlike Martin Grossman, who killed a cop and tried to cover up his crime, and who was convicted on the basis of strong physical evidence, Davis is almost certainly innocent.

But because Davis is not a "brother," a fellow Jew, the Chabad followers and the haredim who cried and wailed and fought for Grossman have done nothing to help Davis.

In the same way, the Chabad and haredi community that has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Sholom Rubashkin's defense when there are reams of evidence proving beyond any doubt that Rubashkin is guilty have raised nothing for Troy Davis. They've raised no money and they've offered no protest. They haven't even offered a prayer.

Injustice in America's legal system almost always hurts the poor and the darkly colored.

Lighter colored people, wealthier people almost never notice.

The head of Georgia's Board of Pardons and Savannah's District Atorney are both black. The racism that hurt Troy Davis hurt him 22 years ago when that was not the case.

Sholom Rubashkin and Martin Grossman really did not deserve our support. But the Troy Davises, including the Jewish Troy Davises, who could not get justice because they could not pay for it did and still do.

We are blessed to live in a country whose legal system is almost totally free of antisemitism.

By and large, Jews are treated just like everyone else is – sometimes, as we saw in Rabbi Leib Glantz's Riker's Island bar mitzvah shindig, even better than others are.

But to turn our backs on the Troy Davises of this country is wrong. It is immoral. It is un-Jewish. It is profoundly selfish – especially when so much community effort is thrown into cases like Rubashkin's and Grossman's, who are both guilty way beyond any reasonable doubt.

Troy Davis was killed at 11:08 Eastern Daylight Time tonight, an almost certainly innocent man murdered by a state acting in bad faith.

America cannot have a dealth penalty if the death penalty is this poorly and unfairly adminstered.

Many people fought for Troy Davis, many people prayed for him and many people mourned and cried for him.

That we were not among them is travesty, a shonde.

And we should all be ashamed.

Comments

[chaim]

btw, i saw the headlines and i thought to myself " shmarya isnt bashing chabad??? cant be!" but then i clicked on the article and read all the way through and i finally saw those evil chabad people in action!!! lmao, ILL PAY FOR THE PSYCHIATRIST!

[Shmarya]

Shmarya, you write about frum people not helping non jews, and while this is correct to an extent you must realize that every group looks out for their own. Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton are just two people that come to mind. The same goes for the Hispanic community who have their leaders who try to help them.

This does not mean that frum people are not against what happened to Troy Davis, or that we think that the laws for crack cocaine are fair. I would be the first to admit that crack laws are made to target black people.

Posted by: Levi | September 22, 2011 at 06:59 PM

Please.

Your community members HATE Jesse Jackson and Sharpton in large part because they focus mostly on blacks.

But neither do so exclusively.

But your community only focuses on your community.

Even Martin Grossman was a "ba'al teshuva" (although he probably wasn't).

You're community is often selfish and myopic and racist and bigoted.

No one (at least most people) made it a "jew issue". Most people say that it was a gross injustice and since he's Jewish and frum we are going to campaign for him.

Secondly, let's not make like many people are sitting such long sentences for the type of crime he commited. I would even venture to say that there is not ONE person who commited the same crime that he commited and has such a sentence.

Posted by: Levi | September 22, 2011 at 07:41 PM
Shlomo

This is absolutely false.

This website is full of examples to the contrary, from Nathan Lewin calling Judge Reade "Haman" to rants about antisemitism from Chabad and haredi commenters.

Do you really think you can lie here and get away with it?

You can't and you won't.

[Levi]

Why are you lying, you show me one person who was convicted of 86 counts, and perjured himself on the witness stand, gave money for co defendants to flee the country, destroyed evidence while out on bail. Had a bag with cash and passports, ready to go on the run, bribed the mayor of the town. I know you cannot find someone equal to this case, there is only one his name is Sholom Rubashkin.

Posted by: OMG | September 22, 2011 at 09:11 PM

86 Counts is a cool number, but in fact it doesn't mean that much. What he did was inflate his company's value hoping for a higher loan. The bank know this, but they didn't care because they were getting paid back. All this ended after the single biggest raid ever conducted in US history by immegration officers on his plant, and as a result was unable to pay back.

Is what he did a crime..yes! does he deserve this sentence, and being ripped to pieces by people like you? NO.

[Tam]

Good morning Shmarya,

Take your heads out of the sands.

I've been saying for years that the american justice system is morally corrupt. Start researching and you'll find countless cases of Troy Davisis, who were murdered by our own government as scapegoats to crimes they surely did not commit, or based on very thin circumstantial evidence.

It's long overdue that we raise hell!

[OMG]

Posted by: Levi | September 22, 2011 at 10:07 PM

No, you could lie to yourself but any objective reader knows the truth. For over ten years, Agriprocessors inflated the receivable and inventory so they could get money for operating expensive, it started small, but over the years, it ballooned to 12 million dollars. Imagine 37.5% of the total 32 million dollars credit line, a cool 12 million dollars, was received via fraudulent invoices. You are stupid to argue that the bank knew about the fraud, because the fact is, the second when the bank got a whiff of the fraud, they called the loan, and that is when Agriprocessor filed for bankruptcy. Moreover, you still have the audacity to argue that he wanted to pay back the loan. Rubashkin would not and could not ever pay back the full 32 million principal; the company did not have that amount of money that is why they resorted to fraudulent invoicing. As much as Madoff wanted to pay back the billion but, could not pay, back either. Capish.

[JRKmommy]

Shmarya:

I don't begrudge anyone, including Rubashkin or Grossman, their lawyers and supporters. In a justice system that isn't always perfect, cases which are vigorously defended can cast some needed light. As well, if someone's eyes are open to the issues with capital punishment because they were suddenly able to relate to a victim, that's fine with me.

At the same time, Rubashkin and Grossman supporters need to realize that many of the issues had nothing to do with anti-semitism, and are common within the justice system. If they were truly awakened to problems, they need to see the importance of making the system worked better for EVERYONE.

[who knows]

"A Grievous Injustice" is that the police officer and father of two little children is long dead, while his murderer, Troy Davis lives for over 20 years at tax payers expense and becomes a celebrity because for only one reason - because he is black. This is "A Grievous Injustice" indeed.

[jvliv]

Usually, people who recant their stories become and are considered unreliable witnesses, so they don't bear a lot of credibility in these proceedings, don't count on that for an appeal, a harsh reality of the legal system.

Re: Davis v. State
263 Ga. 5, 426 S.E.2d 844
Ga.,1993.
February 26, 1993

Defendant was convicted in the Superior Court, Chatham County, James W. Head, J., of murder, obstruction of law enforcement officer, aggravated assault and possession of firearm during commission of felony. Defendant appealed. The Supreme Court, Hunt, P.J., held that: (1) denial of severance of two aggravated assault counts was not an abuse of discretion; (2) prosecutor raised neutral reasons for use of peremptory strikes against black prospective jurors; and (3) evidence supported statutory aggravating circumstances that murder was committed against police officer while engaged in performance of official duties and murder was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman.

Fact that police officer was “moonlighting” as a security guard when he was shot by defendant did not preclude conviction for felony offense of obstructing law enforcement officer in lawful discharge of his official duties.

Defendant was not entitled to severance of two aggravated assault counts, one based upon his attack upon customer at restaurant which led to victim's intervention and death and the other based on shooting less than two hours earlier in which defendant, using same gun involved in murder and other aggravated assault, shot another person with whom he was angry; the offenses were connected in that they occurred the same evening, same gun was involved, second assault was reason victim tried to arrest defendant, and there was some evidence that one reason defendant shot victim was because he was afraid he had been in area where first assault had occurred.

Offenses may be tried together when they are based on same conduct or constitute a series of acts connected together or when they constitute part of single scheme or plan.

Defendant failed to show either acts of prejudice in jury selection process or the kind of extensive and inflammatory publicity that mandated change of venue in murder case; only 20% of prospective jurors were excused for bias or prejudice arising from their knowledge of case or of people involved in case.

Death-penalty qualification of prospective jurors is not unconstitutional.

Trial court correctly sought prosecutor's explanation for his exercise of strikes even though jury was comprised of majority of blacks in a county that was 64% white where prosecutor used eight out of ten allotted strikes against blacks in selecting from a venire that was 43% black.

Prosecutor offered race-neutral reasons for exercising eight out of ten allotted strikes against blacks; prosecutor struck five because of their clear reluctance to invoke death sentence, another was struck because he testified that defendant lived in area where some of his relatives lived and he referred to defendant by his first name even though he claimed to not know him personally, another testified that he used to work with defendant's mother and aunt and admitted knowing them would affect his ability to reach fair decision, and last juror was struck because police came to her house to arrest her son for burglary and her daughter was receiving psychiatric treatment for shoplifting problem.

State is under duty to reveal any understanding or agreement with witness concerning criminal charges pending against that witness.

There was no error in requiring defense mitigation witnesses to testify subject to cross-examination in murder case and not allowing defense merely to introduce in evidence written letters from family members and neighbors.

Jury was not mislead by charge referring to finding statutory aggravating factors beyond a reasonable doubt without mentioning additional requirement of unanimity in capital murder prosecution where charge contained numerous references to unanimity requirement.

Evidence supported statutory aggravating circumstances that murder was committed against peace officer while engaged in performance of his official duties and was outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible, or inhuman; victim, a police officer wearing his official uniform, in course of his official duties, ordered defendant to halt as the latter fled after committing aggravated assault and instead of halting, defendant shot victim in face, seriously disfiguring it and then he walked up to victim as he lay on ground and inflicted fatal wound to the chest.

Davis contends his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to certain evidence and charges, for not requesting certain jury charges, and for not recalling a witness for additional cross-examination. The record supports the trial court's determination that Davis has shown neither deficient attorney performance nor actual prejudice and, therefore, has failed to show he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Ferrell v. State, 261 Ga. 115(3), 401 S.E.2d 741 (1991).

Death sentence imposed on defendant who murdered police officer was neither excessive nor disproportionate to penalties imposed in similar cases considering defendant and the crime.(Ga. Code Ann., § 17-10-35
§ 17-10-35. Review of death sentences)

But wait, I have more...

Davis v. Terry
625 F.3d 716
C.A.11 (Ga.),2010.
November 05, 2010 (Approx. 3 pages)

To make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, as required to be entitled to a certificate of appealability (COA) in a habeas proceeding, a petitioner must show that it is debatable among reasonable jurists that the district court's assessment of the claim was wrong. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253(c)(2).

He would have gone down under felony murder rule anyway as an accomplice.

To the blogger owner of this site, your comparison to the Rubashkin case is compelling, yet irrelevant to this case, which shows only that you do not use the rule of law, but the rule of passion, not a very competent thing to do, rather...childish. You can't have it both ways. It has always been a good old American tradition that money always buys the best lawyers and the best defenses, ask any of the Kennedy's. Didn't you knew that?

This guy, with all due respect of his supporters, if he was not the principal, (for what I have read in ALL the WESTLAW database) was then an accomplice if not the principal in a felonious beating, pistol whipping of another,that resulted in the killing of a someone who tried to help.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I agree with his execution for the reasons I mentioned supra.