Troy Davis: Doubt casts bigger shadow than we realized
Since DNA evidence became available and admissible in court, 17 people who had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death by execution were later exonerated by DNA. Those innocent people were then freed, often with the support of the very same prosecutors who had initially proved they were guilty “beyond the shadow of a doubt.”
Think about that. Without the tool of DNA evidence, those 17 innocent people would almost certainly have been executed for crimes that they did not commit. In effect, they would have become innocent victims of a society and a legal system that abhor the taking of innocent life. (Since 1973, the Death Penalty Information Center says, more than a hundred people condemned to Death Row have had their sentences overturned because of doubts about their guilt.)
Now think about the hundreds of people on Death Row today for whom no DNA evidence exists. It did not help prove their guilt, and it cannot prove their innocence. It is silent on their case. I have no doubt that most of those on Death Row are guilty of the heinous crimes that they’ve been convicted of committing. However, no honest accounting can claim that they are ALL guilty. Not when, in 17 documented cases in which DNA evidence did exist, it was used to free innocent people who had been wrongly convicted and faced execution.
Every single one of those 17 cases is a caution sign telling us that we do not know all that we think we know, that doubt casts a bigger shadow than we previously understood. In fact, given those numbers, the odds dictate that one or two or even a dozen people convicted of murder without DNA evidence and now on Death Row are innocent.
But which ones are they? Mathematics tells us that the innocent exist; it does not identify who they are.
I can’t say that I think Troy Davis, scheduled to be executed this week for murdering Savannah Police Officer Mark Allen MacPhail, is innocent. My best guess is that he isn’t. My best guess, having reviewed as much of the evidence as I can, is that Davis probably did kill MacPhail. But there is no DNA evidence in the case, no fingerprint evidence, to substantiate that fact. The case is based almost entirely on testimony from eyewitnesses that in some instances has altered over the passage of time.
Davis should not be freed. The minimal doubt that may exist about his guilt does not rise to the level needed to justify overturning his conviction. However, the sense of closure and justice that would be provided to some by his execution does not outweigh the possibility that we would be compounding one tragic killing by committing another.
Seventeen, in this context, is a very big number.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2012 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
317 comments Add your comment
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:03 pm
Jay, As you and most everyone on this blog have stated, it’s still the best justice system in the World. Yes it’s unfortunate that out of hundreds of thousands of criminals an extremely small amount may not be guilty, but it will have to do until something better comes along.
God can then separate the good from the bad, that’s his job.
Jay
September 20th, 2011
6:06 pm
When God does that sorting, Poison, what’s he gonna say about those who weren’t too bothered at the prospect of killing innocent people?
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:07 pm
I guess I have concerns about the guilty that get off scott free, case in point, OJ and Casey Anthony just to name two.
It costs approx anywhere from $35,000 to $50,000 per year to keep these criminals behind bars, wouldn’t it be nice to use that money to educate our children.
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:09 pm
Jay
” When God does that sorting, Poison, what’s he gonna say about those who weren’t too bothered at the prospect of killing innocent people?”
Jay, I don’t think anyone wants to see anyone killed, but it’s our system and 12 people decide the outcome, not just one.
Midori
September 20th, 2011
6:10 pm
the whole thing just does not feel right.
josef
September 20th, 2011
6:13 pm
I am conflicted on the death penalty. In many cases, I could gladly flip the switch and feel I had done humanity a service. Yet, if only one innocent is executed, that’s one too many. The bar has to be set very, very high in these cases. I don’t know whether or not this man is guilty, but there is enough of a question to not impose the death sentence in my opinion.
ty webb
September 20th, 2011
6:14 pm
Jay, save your poutrage, it’s not like he’s being waterboarded afterall. If it helps you cope, Just think of it as a “post birth abortion”
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:16 pm
Ty, I am Ghoulishly laughing at that one.
josef
September 20th, 2011
6:16 pm
poison
Have you seen either version of “Twelve Angry Men?” I’m an unshakeable advocate of the jury of peers system and consider it, with habeas corpus, at the very foundation of our legal system, but, there’s always that question of “peers…” In a capital case, that is critical…
Mary Elizabeth
September 20th, 2011
6:18 pm
“Will have to do” is an expression that is remarkably divorced, emotionally, from the possibility that a man is scheduled to be killed for a crime that he may not have committed. After I had read “Wealth,” I said I felt as if I wanted to be washed off. I have that same feeling, now, because of observing what is going down, in Georgia, in the Troy Davis case.
Paul
September 20th, 2011
6:18 pm
Dallas got a new DA who, bucking the city council, set about reviewing the capital cases with DNA methods. Quite a number have been released from prison.
That, and “When God does that sorting… what’s he gonna say about those who weren’t too bothered at the prospect of killing innocent people?
would make another good followup question for Gov Perry. I’m sure a reporter somewhere will put it to him.
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:18 pm
Josef, I don’t know enough about this case, and unless I was on the jury I couldn’t offer an honest opinion. For me to flip the switch I would need concrete proof, then I wouldn’t have a problem.
Concerning Justice
September 20th, 2011
6:19 pm
Justice is so dear to the heart of Nature, that if in the last day one atom of injustice were found, the universe would shrivel like a snakeskin to cast it off forever.
Ancient Proverb
Paul
September 20th, 2011
6:19 pm
josef
Few things terrify me more than the idea of a trial by ‘peers’ in a capital case.
Paul
September 20th, 2011
6:20 pm
josef
add “if I were innocent.”
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:21 pm
Mary, You need to lighten up on your reading and find books that make you feel good or read them while taking a hot bath.
josef
September 20th, 2011
6:23 pm
MARY ELIZABETH
Good, you’re here…I noticed the other morning when you chimed in in support of Deborah in Athens, you let her slide on the “trailer trash” comment. Do you have a sliding scale on who it is still okay to malign with impunity? I don’t think Dr. King would approve.
Mary Elizabeth
September 20th, 2011
6:24 pm
I am simply appalled at the remarks of both ty webb (6:14) and poison pen (6:16).
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:24 pm
Paul
September 20th, 2011
6:19 pm
josef
” Few things terrify me more than the idea of a trial by ‘peers’ in a capital case.”
Paul, If that happened in the OJ case then Mr. Goldman would have found some closure.
josef
September 20th, 2011
6:25 pm
PAUL
I certainly agree with you on that as a terrorizing thought…but, as imperfect as it is, it sure beats anything else I’ve seen…
And BTW I NEVER get chosen for jury duty…wonder why?
getalife
September 20th, 2011
6:26 pm
cons are pro death.
Lea Reiter
September 20th, 2011
6:26 pm
I challenge anyone who says “we have the best justice system in the world” to show me the data points used to reach this conclusion. And I mean hard numbers comparing the United States to other nations … including civilized countries.
If the U.S. incarcerates 22 – 25% of the world’s prisoners, and the U.S. holds 5% of the world’s population, and it’s true that we have the best legal system in the world, then we’re raising some very disturbing questions. For example, are humans that lacking in self control that it takes the U.S. crack legal system to post such high incarceration figures? And if it’s not true that we have the best legal system in the world, then what does THAT say?
I fear our own arrogance (”we have the best legal system in the world”) may blind us to the need for some much needed reform.
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:27 pm
Mary Elizabeth
” I am simply appalled at the remarks of both ty webb (6:14) and poison pen (6:16).”
Mary, Who gives a rats azz what you think. I am appalled by your long and boring liberal posts.
ty webb
September 20th, 2011
6:27 pm
Well then, my work is done here…I’ve apalled someone who sees “Jim Crow” around every corner. ya’ll have a good one.
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:28 pm
getalife
” cons are pro death.”
Getalife, Then you better pray that I never get on your jury.
getalife
September 20th, 2011
6:29 pm
pp,
Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.
Peadawg
September 20th, 2011
6:30 pm
Thank you, Jay, for doing a blog about this.
“But there is no DNA evidence in the case, no fingerprint evidence, to substantiate that fact.” – And also the fact that, what, 7 or 9 witness have contradicted or retracted their testimonies.
There’s so much doubt in this case that anyone who says they think Mr. Davis killed a cop with a straight face is a pathetic person.
Mary Elizabeth
September 20th, 2011
6:31 pm
josef@6:23
As I recall, I supported her comments regarding how vouchers could severely harm public education. I don’t recall the context of her “trailer trash” comment although I remember she used those words. Josef, imho, at times you focus on the insignificant. Btw, I was not giving her support in contrast to your remarks. Your remarks had nothing to do with my support. I simply agreed with her essential contention.
Doggone/GA
September 20th, 2011
6:31 pm
I’m paraphrasing here, but one of the most disgusting court decisions I have ever heard was some court (sorry, don’t know all the details) that basicall said Davis should be “satisified” because all the legalities hasd been followed as far as they could go.
If he’s INNOCENT, he should be SATISIFED that he’s going to be executed for a crime he didn’t commit?
To my mind there is enough doubt to make this latest decision nothing but a sop to the dead man’s families desire for revenge. It won’t be JUSTICE for that dead man if it turns out an innocent man was executed.
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:31 pm
Lea, Maybe we have the high numbers because a lot of their countries dump their trash on us, or maybe because we are one of a few melting pots in the World.
Please show me the mix of nationalities in these other countries that we have and their percentages, then I might give some concern as to what you claim.
Malkavian Philosopher
September 20th, 2011
6:33 pm
I guess it’s just my taste in the matter of a Justice System based on dispensing justice based on how much Representation you can afford, but I think I can sum up my sentiments on this case with a quote: “It is better one hundred guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer. — Benjamin Franklin” All we have had in this case is hearsay, no DNA Evidence, no forensic evidence, only the “Sworn” (Let’s face it, if Uncle Sam posed a 5-Cent/Lie-told-under-oath Tax, and actually had a way of enforcing it, there would be no deficit, even with 3 wars in the current ongoings…people lie on the stand all the time.) testimony of people put on the stand by the very judicial system looking to snuff him out permanently. If we now can condemn someone to death based on hearsay alone, and are now able to negate the rule of double-jeopardy (In the recent case of the Federal Government overturning a conviction it had on Jose Padilla based on “The Judge wasn’t strict enough with sentencing”. I do not dispute his guilt in the conviction. The issue is that we can now, if this fiasco succeeds, be convicted in a court of law, then be forced to face yet another trial for the same [Alleged, of course. Remember, 'Innocent until proven guilty'] crimes just because they didn’t like the verdict handed out the first time) , then I truly fear for the Rule of Law in this country. I see more evidence day by day that we have slipped into a country that follows the ideal of Rule of Force, rather than the ideals we broke from the British Crown with.
josef
September 20th, 2011
6:33 pm
Lea
At the same time you do need to remember that we are an incredibly violent society on that same world stage…and the death penalty seems to have little effect on that if you look at statistics from other developed countries which have the death penalty…but, still, all in all, when it comes to trial by jury, I’ll stake my luck there…I think we need to look more at the prosecution/penalty aspects…and THERE I have some serious reservations…
poison pen
September 20th, 2011
6:34 pm
Getalife, I don’t do crime, and your one liners are getting tiresom.
Peadawg
September 20th, 2011
6:34 pm
What kills me (no pun intended, I promise) about this most recent try at clemency is when the people who heard the cases yesterday said Troy Davis didn’t do enough to prove his innocence. I’m sorry, but that’s f’ed up. Since when does someone have to prove their innocence? Isn’t it innocent until proven guilty.
Schrodingers cat
September 20th, 2011
6:35 pm
He had his judicial review and it wasn’t enough to overturn the sentence…..however I am pro-life, I don’t think we should kill the criminals or the innocents …unfortunately it’s the criminals that get all the attention!
Max
September 20th, 2011
6:35 pm
Who are you to kill people…….
getalife
September 20th, 2011
6:36 pm
pp,
Don’t read them.
josef
September 20th, 2011
6:38 pm
MARY ELIZABETH
I may focus on what you would term “insignificant.” I might well have agreed with her summation on vouchers, too, had she not gone into that acceptable “insignificant” bigotry. After that, it was not possible for me to credit her with any validity. If you can, then go for it. What if she had said “projects trash?” Then what? Not to be too snarky, but I think you might want to go back to the water fountain for another epiphany. It was a supercillious and arrogant “I’m superior” attitude. No empathy whatsoever.
Schrodingers cat
September 20th, 2011
6:40 pm
get – ” cons are pro death.”
_______________________
unless we’re talkin about abortion…on that is flipped…..weird huh?
Aquagirl
September 20th, 2011
6:41 pm
Since when does someone have to prove their innocence?
Since *after* they’ve been found guilty.
Compassion
September 20th, 2011
6:42 pm
I bet if this were a family member many would be singing a completely different tune…injustice is fine as long as it happens to someone else…well, eventually someone else ALWAYS becomes you…and I can’t wait until the day those that sat back and did nothing or think this situation is funny or not that big of a deal are made to lie in their own beds.
getalife
September 20th, 2011
6:46 pm
cat,
Weird?
Typical con hypocrisy.
josef
September 20th, 2011
6:47 pm
Compassion
I tend to agree with you fairly strongly on that…
Midori
I’m like you, there’s just something not completely right in this one…there’s too much doubt…too many unanswered questions…
1811/0311
September 20th, 2011
6:47 pm
Jay:
I agree with you on this ………… with the follwing conditions:
1) Solitary confinement without the chance of parole.
2) No visitors (family or friends) for the rest of his life because he is “dead” just like the officer he murdered.
3) He can see no movies/television programs or read any books/newspapers that were produced or written after the date of death of the officer he murdered.
P.S.
Anyone who changed their testimony under oath must be prosecuted for perjury and if convicted receive at least 3 years in prison.
Otherwise ……………… let ‘er rip.
Mark Azerty
September 20th, 2011
6:48 pm
Jay, the standard for conviction is not “beyond a shadow of a doubt,” but “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Not very many cases have evidence “beyond a shadow of a doubt.” This is the definition of reasonable doubt used in Connecticut:
The meaning of reasonable doubt can be arrived at by emphasizing the word reasonable. It is not a surmise, a guess or mere conjecture. It is not a doubt raised by anyone simply for the sake of raising a doubt. It is such a doubt as, in serious affairs that concern you, you would heed; that is, such a doubt as would cause reasonable men and women to hesitate to act upon it in matters of importance. It is not hesitation springing from any feelings of pity or sympathy for the accused or any other person who might be affected by your decision. It is, in other words, a real doubt, an honest doubt, a doubt that has its foundation in the evidence or lack of evidence. It is doubt that is honestly entertained and is reasonable in light of the evidence after a fair comparison and careful examination of the entire evidence.
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all doubt; the law does not require absolute certainty on the part of the jury before it returns a verdict of guilty. The law requires that, after hearing all the evidence, if there is something in the evidence or lack of evidence that leaves in your minds, as reasonable men and women, a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused, then the accused must be given the benefit of that doubt and acquitted. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that precludes every reasonable hypothesis except guilt and is inconsistent with any other rational conclusion.
Mary Elizabeth
September 20th, 2011
6:48 pm
Josef@ 6:38
“Not to be too snarky, but I think you might want to go back to the water fountain for another epiphany. It was a supercillious and arrogant “I’m superior” attitude. No empathy whatsoever.”
——————————-
What in the world are you referring to, Josef? Be specific, please.
jt
September 20th, 2011
6:51 pm
“. In effect, they would have become innocent victims of a society and a legal system that abhor the taking of innocent life.”
.
I do not know of such society or legal system Bookman speaks of.
Nor does he.
Like most progressives………….he is fooling himself.
josef
September 20th, 2011
6:51 pm
Mark Azerty
Yes. One of the reasons I recommend “Twelve Angry Men” so highly…
Stonethrower
September 20th, 2011
6:54 pm
“Twelve Angry Men”…..fiction. Doesn’t happen like that in the real world. A lot of folks would be happy if we had public executions.
Schrodingers cat
September 20th, 2011
6:54 pm
get –
you slay