Execution is imminent!!:Help save Troy Davies

Troy Davis was convicted of the August 19, 1989, murder of Georgia police officer Mark MacPhail, who was working as a security guard at a Burger King when he intervened in an argument between several men in a nearby parking lot. He was shot in the heart and face without having drawn his gun. One of the men, Sylvester Coles, went to police and implicated Davis in the killing, and he was arrested four days later. During Davis’ 1991 trial, many witnesses testified they had seen Davis shoot MacPhail. Two others testified that Davis had confessed the murder to them. The murder weapon was never found, and no physical evidence linked Davis to the crime. Throughout his trial and subsequent appeals, Davis has maintained his innocence but was sentenced to death in August 1991. Seven of nine witnesses to the murder changed or recanted their testimony in recent years. Several stated they had felt pressure by police to implicate Davis. New witnesses implicated Coles in the crime. Many appeals in state and federal courts followed. Davis and his lawyers argued that the racial composition of the jury and poor advocacy from his lawyers had affected his right to a fair trial. In an August 2010 decision, the conviction was upheld, with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia declaring that the new evidence cast only 'minimal doubt on his conviction'. Subsequent appeals, including to the Supreme Court, were rejected. In July 2007, September 2008, and October 2008, execution dates were scheduled but stayed shortly before the events took place

The case against him consisted entirely of witness testimony which contained inconsistencies even at the time of the trial. Since then, all but two of the state's non-police witnesses from the trial have recanted or contradicted their testimony. Many of these witnesses have stated in sworn affidavits that they were pressured or coerced by police into testifying or signing statements against Troy Davis. One of the two witnesses who has not recanted his testimony is Sylvester "Red" Coles — the principle alternative suspect, according to the defense, against whom there is new evidence implicating him as the gunman. Nine individuals have signed affidavits implicating Sylvester Coles.

For the Georgia prosecutor who put Troy Davis on trial in 1991 for killing a cop and won a conviction, there were two cases being fought. "There is the legal case, the case in court, and the public relations case," Spencer Lawton, the former Chatham County prosecutor, said. "We have consistently won the case as it has been presented in court. We have consistently lost the case as it has been presented in the public realm, on TV and elsewhere."

Lawton spoke to CNN about the Davis case, his first interview on the case since Davis' initial trial, after the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles denied clemency for the death-row inmate on Tuesday. Davis was convicted of the 1989 killing of Savannah, Georgia, police officer Mark MacPhail. He is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection at 7 p.m. Wednesday at a state prison in Jackson, Georgia. After he was sentenced to death, Davis' lawyers filed a federal court appeal insisting there was "no physical evidence linking" Davis to MacPhail’s murder. They called the testimony of a ballistics expert that shell casings from another shooting by Davis matched casings found at the murder scene an "remarkable coincidence".

Lawton says he believes the outrage over the sentence resulted from a public relations campaign by Davis' supporters, while prosecutors remained silent outside the courtroom. "It's just been my policy, that I not comment on a pending case - and this case has been pending for two decades," he said. "For two decades, I've maintained my silence. That meant I could never respond. "So we have been at an extreme disadvantage in the public relations campaign for that reason, because we felt that we were ethically bound to maintain our silence and express our opinions and judgments on the facts in court, which is where we have. And every place we have, we have won."

Now that he can speak, since he considers the case officially closed with the parole board's ruling, he wants to clear the air about a few things. He told CNN he has no doubt about Davis' guilt. He said he believes supporters have been misinformed about the facts of the case. He said he believed that documents from early on in the trial were being "exploited" when supporters tried to cast doubt on physical evidence or said there was none.

Davis was convicted of the first, non-fatal, shooting in Savannah's Cloverdale neighborhood that night. Lawton said there was confusion over evidence in the murder case because the shell casings from both shootings wound up in the same evidence bag. "That confusion was subsequently resolved; it was resolved adequately at trial," he said. "Our problem, from the state's point of view, is the documents, which initially reflect the initial confusion, are still out there and are being exploited to that end."

Davis' supporters also have attacked the witness testimony in the murder trial as shoddy and pointed out that several witnesses, including some who had claimed that Davis told them he killed the officer, later recanted their testimony, in some case blaming pressure from police. But Lawton said recanted statements don't deserve the validity they have been given in media accounts. He said a judge ruled they were at the very least "suspect" because they were not given under oath and prosecutors never got the opportunity to cross-examine the recanting witnesses in court. He also said the question of duress cuts both ways. "I think that what you would find is there was as much duress applied to get the affidavits as the affidavits are said to contain allegations of duress on the part of police," he said.

And Lawton question why it took Davis' lawyers 15 or 20 years to get these witnesses to recant and why they then waited until eight days before Davis' first scheduled execution to make these explosive statements public. Lawton told CNN he believes "that the affidavits of recantation were of more value to the attorneys as a device for delay than they were valuable as a device for substantive argument."

Lawton said the lengthy nature of the case has helped rampant speculation override the facts. "It has been a game of delay throughout. The longer the delay, the more time they have to create not doubt, not honest doubt, not real doubt, but the appearance of doubt," he said. "And there are people who have not troubled themselves to acquaint themselves with the record, who don't know the facts, who do oppose the death penalty and who have been willing on the strength of that emotion alone to assume the truth of the allegations of the weakness of evidence in the case."

Lawton said some people who are fully aware of the facts believe the death penalty doesn't fit the crime, and he understands how they've reached that conclusion. Lawton said he doesn't feel Tuesday's ruling resulted in a "happy day for anyone." "I have no brief for the death penalty. If it were to evaporate tomorrow, it would suit me fine," he said. "On the other hand, it is a part of, a component of, Georgia's law and that's what I was sworn to uphold." Lawton said he's against mob justice of any kind. "Would it be different if all these people were agitating to have someone executed? The criminal justice system should cow in the face of that kind of mob action? No, we would all say no," he said. "That's not the way the system is supposed to operate."

You call amnesty international 'reliable' They have a very big biased agenda when it comes to the death penalty. Just remember that a judge has considered all this and still thinks the bloke should die . And changed or recanted their stories is extremely vague. Good riddance to the murdering savage.

You call amnesty international 'reliable' They have a very big biased agenda when it comes to the death penalty. Just remember that a judge has considered all this and still thinks the bloke should die . And changed or recanted their stories is extremely vague. Good riddance to the murdering savage.

I don't like how that weird porn star has hijacked this thing (although her father was a lawyer who represent OJ Simpson).

Fool, the judge is omniscient right? your naivety is depressing... humans do get things wrong... the guys asking for a lie detector test and they don't even wanna give him that wtf EDIT: also his judgement is based on what the witnesses said previously, but they've now admitted they lied

WTF? Jeez, this really is more than some guy trying to kick up a fuss before he signs out.

Davis' supporters also have attacked the witness testimony in the murder trial as shoddy and pointed out that several witnesses, including some who had claimed that Davis told them he killed the officer, later recanted their testimony, in some case blaming pressure from police. But Lawton said recanted statements don't deserve the validity they have been given in media accounts. He said a judge ruled they were at the very least "suspect" because they were not given under oath and prosecutors never got the opportunity to cross-examine the recanting witnesses in court. He also said the question of duress cuts both ways. "I think that what you would find is there was as much duress applied to get the affidavits as the affidavits are said to contain allegations of duress on the part of police," he said.

And Lawton question why it took Davis' lawyers 15 or 20 years to get these witnesses to recant and why they then waited until eight days before Davis' first scheduled execution to make these explosive statements public. Lawton told CNN he believes "that the affidavits of recantation were of more value to the attorneys as a device for delay than they were valuable as a device for substantive argument."

The OP clearly has a biased angle and is presenting the facts in that way to. This is what actually happened at trial;

yh cnn are totally truthful in all world events.

I'd take their opinion on world events over yours any day.

i'm not a news broadcaster am i? i've provided sources.

No, you've provided a biased account of events - not least being the witness evidence claim you mentioned above (i.e. that witnesses recanted their statements), yet neglecting to mention the judge at the trail of Mr Davis found the witness statements suspect anyways, so placed no emphasis on them in trial. Not to mention not countering the myriad of other problems with Davis's lawyers mentioned in the CNN article above (i.e. it taking them 20 years to bring forward these witness statement recantments and even then, they choose to do so not in the subsequent trials Davis had to present his case (i.e. the proper forum), but a week or so before his execution - in other words, they were of no substance, but used merely to buy extra time).

But you continue on with your nonsense