Troy Anthony Davis Will Die This Month--Unless....
Troy Anthony Davis is scheduled to be executed in Georgia on Tuesday, Sept. 23. He was convicted of killing a cop on the testimony of nine witnesses with no physical evidence. Davis says he's innocent, and seven of the nine witnesses have since recanted their testimony. Some said they were pushed to testify by the police; some said they believe one of the two remaining witnesses who still blames Davis actually did the killing.
So why hasn't Troy Davis simply gotten a new trial? It's because of a misguided 1996 Newt Gingrich era law that makes it much more difficult for a person convicted of a capital crime to appeal. Because of that law, evidence in Davis' support can't even be seen by the court.
But it will be seen on Friday, Sept. 12, by the Georgia Department of Pardons and Paroles. The department will decide if Troy Anthony Davis should be executed.
We aren't asking anyone to write the Georgia Department of Pardons and Paroles to declare Davis innocent. We're simply asking that you ask them to truly consider the evidence. It's quite easy. Simply click on the link to the ACLU, which has provided an easy-to-use online form. If at all possible, please do this by Friday, Sept. 12. But even if it's after that date, please still do it.
Act now to demand justice and stop the execution of Troy Anthony Davis.
- - - - -
To see all blog entries dealing with Troy Anthony Davis, click on http://www.loveshade.org/blog-mt/mt-search.fcgi?IncludeBlogs=1&search=troy+anthony+davis
Comments
Come on, he has to be guilty. He's black, isn't he?
Posted by: George the Gorge | September 10, 2008 05:30 PM
I hope ur joking George! But really him being black doesn't help. I sent an email in. I hope it helps! This is just so wrong. How can there be a law that they can't show the court evidence that someone may be innocent?
Posted by: Lorien Loveshade | September 13, 2008 12:37 AM
I hope a lot of you sent emails! An innocent man may die if you don't help! The laws are so totally wrong. It's like America wants to punish people and they don't really care if it's the right person or not. Especially if a cop got killed.
Posted by: Lorien Loveshade | September 13, 2008 01:48 AM
This information if applied to the Troy Davis case will free him. That is if his attorney[s] are working for him and not against him.
During this case, at anytime was Mr. Davis informed of his full rights under the constitution, was he ever informed of the facts stated in the decision below, which applie to Troy Davis.
This statement presented in the case of HERSHAL HALE, Defendant/Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff/Respondent. District Court Number CR-99-0132MJJ. In this case it is stated that…
At the onset, “flimsy criminal indictment.” cf. id., is in question marks to show that Defendant Hale’s supporting evidence of proof, in connection with the underlying fictitious, “flimsy criminal indictment,” rests upon the strength and the dignity of the Office of the Presidency of the United States of America, cf. id., because proof of “massive” flimsy criminal indictment[s,]” is furnished on this record by the President of the United States of America. See The Final Days, 1, 261-62 (citation omitted) (1974; 2006) (quoting Oval Office interview that the U.S. Department of Justice, by the President’s own admission, prosecutes “blind” “pawns” with flimsy criminal indictment[s]
Put cogently, the criminal indictment upon which the court haled the defendant into court is the very beginning, as discussed, supra, is a “flimsy criminal indictment.” Id. Thus, the Court was utterly devoid of subject-matter or in personam jurisdiction in this matter from the very beginning. See Midland Asphalt v. United States, 499 U.S. 794, 802, 109 S. Ct, 1494, 103 L. Ed. 2d 879 (1989) (“Only a defect so fundamental that it causes a grand jury to no longer be a grand jury, or the indictment to no longer be an indictment, gives rise to the constitutional right not to be tried.”).
The case of See Schlup v. Delo, supra, 513 U.S., at __, 130 L.Ed. 2d, at 834 protects Mr. Davis’s “newly discovered” and newly asserted” claim of “actual and factual innocence.” Id.
Pawn, v. To deliver personal property in pledge to another in pledge, or as security for a debt or sum borrowed.
Pawn, n. A bailment of goods to a creditor, as security for some debt or engagement; pledge; deposit of personal property made to a pawnbroker as security for a loan. That sort of bailment where goods or chattels are delivered to another as security to him for money borrowed of him by the bailor. Also the specific chattel delivered to the creditor as a pledge.
Is Mr. Davis a ward of the court? If so, how and when was he made a ward of the court? Did Mr. Davis enter into every situation, every signed document, willingly, knowingly, intentionally, voluntarily, intelligently. Was Mr. Davis ever advised of his rights as a member of the national citizenry of this country?
Has this court overridden any U.S. Supreme Court decisions? If yes, does it have the right to do so? Under what jurisdiction is this court operating?
Remember ~ The practice of Law CAN NOT be licensed by any state/State. Schware v. Board of Examiners, 353 U.S. 238, 239. The "certificate" from the State Supreme Court only authorizes: To practice Law, "in Courts" as a member of the State Judicial Branch of Government. A bar card holder can only represent "wards of the Court". The state bar card is not a license; it is a Union Dues Card of a Professional Association. There is nothing in this decision that states attorneys are working for the good of the public, the national citizenry of this nation.
Posted by: Fela | September 18, 2008 04:02 PM
Hi. Life isn't fair. It's just fairer than death, that's all. What is dead is not to come back.
Posted by: Troy from Singapore | September 13, 2009 02:28 PM