Troy Davis Execution Has Some Asking: Is it Time to Revamp Our Eyewitness Identification System?
- Posted on September 27, 2011 at 7:20am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
SAVANNAH, Ga. (The Blaze/AP) — Before he was executed in Georgia last week, Troy Davis brought worldwide attention to his case by challenging the trustworthiness of bystanders who said they saw him shoot a police officer. Davis lost the battle to spare his life, but experts say his case adds fuel to an already-simmering debate over how much weight courts should give to eyewitness testimony.
The Blaze also brought you the story of Fernando Bermudez last week. Bermudez was accused of murder and imprisoned for 18 years. His conviction relied mostly on witness testimony (testimony that was recanted by nearly all of those who originally claimed that he was the perpetrator). Now, following these revelations, Bermudez is finally a free man.
Last month, New Jersey’s top court made it easier for criminal defendants to challenge the credibility of eyewitnesses, while the U.S. Supreme Court is set in November to hear its first case dealing with eyewitness evidence in 34 years. Such issues also played a role in the abolition of Illinois’ death penalty earlier this year and a 2009 law narrowing when capital punishment can be sought in Maryland.
Davis’ execution outraged hundreds of thousands of people who said they feared an innocent man was being put to death, based on his defense attorneys’ assertion that witnesses who had identified Davis in court as a killer two decades ago had tried years later to take it all back. Dorothy Ferrell was one of those witnesses.
“Well, I’m real sure, positive sure, that that is him, and you know, it’s not a mistaken identity,” Ferrell told a Savannah jury in 1991. “I did see him and you know, on the fact of what happened and how it happened, you know, I‘m pretty sure it’s him.”
Nine years later, Ferrell signed an affidavit saying she didn’t actually see the 1989 shooting of off-duty police officer Mark MacPhail, but pointed at Davis to tell police what they wanted to hear.
Legal experts say Davis’ case serves as an example in the debate over eyewitness reliability, particularly in death penalty cases, when scientific studies show the human memory can be surprisingly faulty.
“There’s going to be some broader discussions about whether the death penalty is viable at all, but before that happens there’s going to be efforts to reform and see what can be done in states that believe in it and regularly use it,” said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, which opposes capital punishment.
Even before Davis’ execution last Wednesday, several states had reduced reliance on eyewitnesses.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey, which abolished the death penalty in 2007, last month issued a ruling making it easier for criminal defendants in its state courts to get pre-trial hearings challenging eyewitness evidence. It also requires judges to give juries more detailed instructions about potential flaws in eyewitness identifications.
In 2009, Maryland lawmakers prohibited prosecutors from seeking death unless they have DNA evidence, a videotape of the crime or a videotaped confession from the suspect.
Prior to Davis’ death, PBS Newshour delved deeply into the debate over eyewitness testimony and the death penalty:
“Eyewitness testimony is so horribly inaccurate – even under the very best of circumstances,” said Rob Warden, director of the Chicago-based Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University. “We should never depend on eyewitness testimony in death penalty cases.”
The center says that nationally, out of 138 defendants sentenced to death for murder and then later exonerated since the mid-1970s, 32 had been convicted in whole or in part based on erroneous eyewitness testimony.
As Illinois moved to abolish its death penalty in March, state officials cited Anthony Porter, who was condemned for a 1982 double murder based on eyewitness testimony that authorities later determined was false. Porter got a reprieve just two days before his execution in 1998, and was released from prison the following year.
Meanwhile, a researcher who’s been studying eyewitness issues for 30 years released a study this month that shows police can reduce chances that witnesses will mistakenly point to innocent people in lineups by adopting a few simple procedures.
Gary Wells, an Iowa State University psychology professor, studied 497 instances of witnesses to real crimes looking at lineups on police computers in four states. He found that when witnesses looked at a group of photos all at once, they were more likely to compare faces and pick the one that most resembled the suspect – whether it was correct or not.
The rate of wrong identifications declined, from 18 percent to 12 percent, when witnesses viewed the photos one at a time.
Willis says the one-by-one approach would also make in-person lineups more reliable. It also helps if the officer working with the witness doesn’t know the suspect is, to avoid influencing the outcome. He says police should also tell witnesses it‘s OK if they can’t pick a suspect out of a lineup.
“These kinds of events that people witness, whether a victim or a bystander, often happen very quickly, they’re unexpected,” Wells said. “It‘s not like the only thing to look at is the perpetrator’s face. There are other things going on; people fear for their safety.”
Prosecutors balk at the idea that people are sentenced to death based purely on eyewitness testimony. In Davis’ case, for example, prosecutors used shell casings recovered from the scenes of two different shootings hours apart to link the crimes to Davis, who admitted being at both places when shots were fired. A firearms examiner testified it was likely, but not certain, the casings came from the same gun. Some witnesses who identified Davis as the killer have never backed off their stories.
Scott Burns, director of the National District Attorneys Association, said advances in crime scene investigating technology have made it tougher for prosecutors to lean too heavily on eyewitnesses. He said he prosecuted a car-theft case in Utah years ago in which jurors asked if he had any DNA evidence.
“It has raised the expectations of juries,” Burns said. “People want all of their senses stimulated. They want to see pictures, they want to watch video.”
But eyewitness testimony remains a cornerstone of prosecutions, with many cases yielding very little physical evidence, said Brandon Garrett, a law professor at the University of Virginia.
In his recent book “Convicting The Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong,” Garrett looked at 190 criminal cases where eyewitnesses helped win convictions for a range of crimes that were later overturned by DNA evidence. He found that witnesses often seemed more confident in identifying suspects from the witness stand years later than they were when interviewed by police right after a crime.
“You had these eyewitnesses almost without exception come into the courtroom and say they were absolutely certain they saw the defendant do the crime,” Garrett said. “But more than half remembered being unsure at the time they saw their first lineup.”
Among the exonerations Garrett studied was that of John Jerome White, who spent nearly 30 years in a Georgia prison for rape until he was exonerated by DNA testing in 2007. The case came with a startling twist: after White’s release, police arrested another man for the same crime – a man who had stood in the same police lineup with White in 1979.
Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, said the legal system is poised to change how it handles eyewitness evidence. The U.S. Supreme Court in November is slated to hear a New Hampshire case that asks whether courts should throw out eyewitness testimony that’s been influenced by friends and neighbors in the same way they would reject witnesses tainted by police.
“The Troy Davis execution came at a time where we‘re at tipping point or there’s critical mass concerning eyewitness reform,” Scheck said, noting the Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on the issue since 1977. “Thirty-four years later, the science dictates it has to change.”
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 589 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 414 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 414 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 378 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 375 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 414 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 414 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 378 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 151 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 303 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 414 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (107)
LukeAppling
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 11:08amThe current system was alright for OJ but not for this slug, is that the idea? How about Mumia, another slug whom liberals have deluded themselves into thinking him a martyr-he is a killer and should be put to death. Cayce Anthony how did that work for you?
Report Post »Bible Quotin' Science Fearin' Conservative American
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 4:13pmum……
Report Post »Name one person besides Casey Anthony who thinks she is innocent. I don‘t know where you pulled that one out from but you’re full of crap. And O.J. is guilty.
Thomas
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 6:23pmJust give us the right to protect our self with deadly force and you can get rid of the death penalty.
Report Post »Thomas
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 6:30pmWhy would it matter if you put someone to death after they have killed me. Just give me the right to defend myself with deadly force and you don‘t even have to worry about arresting anyone if you don’t want to. If you are an American citizen then its not just your right to bare arms but its your duty. You are the police. This idea of Government or law enforcement is going to protect you is a facade. Their isn’t enough cops or money in the world to provide protection to you. Its yours and my job to protect our self. If you have a problem with carrying a gun then I am sorry for you because whether you want to or not you still have a obligate to freedom and with freedom also comes responsibility. There are many people who never wanted to go to war but they had too anyway. The only reason there is not more crime already they criminals don‘t know for sure which Americans have guns and who don’t. You actually should thank your local gun owners for it is because of them that your house remains relatively safe and not because of police who only arrest the criminals after they have committed a crime.
Report Post »kraphtsman
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:38pmIf a conviction was EXCLUSIVELY based on one (or a few) eyewitness reports, and no actual physical evidence, then one could reasonably agree with this story’s premise.
However, THIS murderer (the late Troy Davis) was seen by THIRTY FOUR other eyewitnesses (including four of his PERSONAL FRIENDS who testified it was him) when he shot his victim…not just once, but TWICE, in the parking lot of a busy Burger King. Also,, the murderer’s personal (illegal) gun was recovered from his “crib” (mommy’s house), and the shell casings found at the shooting scene were a perfect match. Furthermore, the blood-stained pants found in the murderer’s washing machine (at mommy’s house) were a genetic match with his victim’s blood (although, this evidence was later disallowed at trial,based on a “technicality”).
This murdering thug was GUILTY AS HELL, and was RIGHTFULLY executed (way, way too late, unfortunately). And all you bleeding hearts/weak-minded people who think THIS case is any reason to cast doubt on “eyewitness” testimony need to do a LOT more homework, and get a grip on reality.
Report Post »rja444
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 11:07amWhy are we trying to screw up the criminal justice system. Thats what so call lawyers are for. We do not need to revamp the system. The system has worked and will continue to work as is. He was given his day in court. what do you propose to use in place of an eyewitness, science is only as good as the people that are using it.
Report Post »ginsberg
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 11:17amSo all those innocent people freed due to dna evidence after years in jail…we just ignore them? Our justice system is deeply flawed and costs billions that could be saved were it reformed. There are over 200 people in jail for life for having under an ounce of marijuana…in what universe does that make sense.
Report Post »Dont-hate-on-me-2
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 12:38pmyour right is is flawed, its too lenient. We can thank all the carebear liberals who dont really care.
Report Post »bigdaddyt46
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 11:05am@aggiebrewer
Report Post »So tell me Big daddy…..How are you the authority on what Jesus MEANT?
What you state is your interpretation of turn the other cheek. Be careful not to assume your opinion is sacrosanct.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
son of a Lutheran Pastor who served his Lord for 40 years. my Dad preached on this very thing many many many times. 8 years college, plus 1 as a vicor, plus anothe 3 years as a junior Pastor. not by sending into the state to be “ordained”.
bigdaddyt46
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 11:14amto add more to my point.
Report Post »my Mom’s Father was a Pastor, his father was a Pastor,his father was a Pastor, his Father was a Pastor. you get it yet?
aggiebrewer
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 12:04pmNone of which qualifies you or your father as infallible or sacred.
Report Post »aggiebrewer
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 12:11pmSo the virtue of your grandfather and your great-grandfather as well as your life as a Christian has somehow made your opinion about the bible more valid than mine? Wow. Now that you have spoken we shall all bow in awe I guess.
Report Post »Liberalismsamentaldisorder
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:56amThis is not a good example. I do have doubt about “eye witness” testimony. Honestly how many of you THOUGHT for sure you saw something then realized you were mistaken? Now, I understand 34 people witnessed this. That’s a different story. If this man was put to death on 1 person’s say so, I’d be dubious. 34? I’m far more comfortable.
Report Post »boca_chica
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:09amThink about how much money is spent on housing and feeding these prisoners( I am talking about convicted killers-absolute proof) and how that money might be used to save the life of a child, or a destitute family.
Report Post »When people demonstrate against the “state” for executing a murderer, they are actually demonstrating against the people of that state.( they are the ones that elected their reps and asked them to pass those laws).
I’d like to see the convicted killer get a dose of truth drug to see how guilty they really are-just a judge and both attornys-might solve an awful lot of crimes that way.
Secret Squirrel
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:38am.
So, we throw out eyewitness testimony.
You shoot someone in public with a revolver, there are no shell casings, no DNA,
and 100 eyewitnesses.
You walk.
Of course, you won‘t be detained because honest citizens won’t be legally armed.
Report Post »Win-win for criminals.
OneLeafTree
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:48amI live in Savannah. I have followed this issue for the last fifteen years I have lived here. Anyone living here more than 5 years has heard and investigated the issue well enough to form their own opinion of the happenings with Troy Davis. He was identified and seen by a police chief at the scene in the middle of the conflict of the beating of a homeless man prior to heading off and murdering one of our police officers. Multiple accounts pointed the finger at him as seeing him in the middle of this conflict. This has become a racial fight in this town, a racial fight in which even Obama himself would not even comment on. Recanting a comment 9 years after making a statement to police is absurd, pressure from those around you, especially those against his punishment will push people over the brink. Look back at the CASEY ANTHONY trial. Listen to the jury after they made their decision….they were scared to put this girl in jail and possibly bring upon her death by injection. YES, eyewitness accounts should be highly accountable. Over 75% (guesstimation) of previous major crimes would not be held accountable without such witnesses.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 3:24pmSecret Squirrel
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:38am
.
So, we throw out eyewitness testimony.
You shoot someone in public with a revolver, there are no shell casings, no DNA,
and 100 eyewitnesses.
You walk.
_____________________________________
Study after study has shown eye witness accounts not to be reliable. http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm http://www1.law.umkc.edu/suni/wrongful_convictions/Eyewitness_Identification.htm http://www.law.yale.edu/news/2727.htm
For Capital Cases, if the only evidence is eye witnesses, in a sane country justice would demand that the death penalty is off the table, because of the unreliability of the evidence.
Report Post »Enciloon
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 6:01pmI am going to preach every day, it is very important that we make sure murderers and rapists live and get as many rights as I want them to have, while I think we should kill as many innocent, unborn fetuses as possible. I am a quality human being huh ?
Report Post »garbagecanlogic
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:09amAnyone who sez the death penalty should be abolished – lend me your most cherished loved one for an hour. You can be in the next room and as you hear the screams etc, you will be more than willing to energize the plug on my death device……………………..
Report Post »Desert Dog
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:47amMy only question is : What took so long?
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:05amNo, it is time to question the stupidity of bleeding heart libs that always side with evil.
There were 34 eye witness accounts of this muder.
Troy the boy was not known for his attendance at Sunday School, he was a career criminal with an extensive criminal record, to include violent crime.
Should not have taken 20 years to give him the blue juice.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:39amRanger Dan, Fact Check – Yes there was 34 witnesses, only 9 testified that they saw Davis murder the off duty cop, out those 9, 7 withdrew their prior testimony.
There was no phyiscal evidence pointing ot Troy, it all was based on the testimony of these 9 eye witnesses. Eye witness tesitmony is proven to be unreliable and should never be the sole basis for capital punishment, to many prisoners have been released from deathrow in Ill. and elsewhere because years later their innocence is proven.
Report Post »Van Bones
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 11:21amHey Encinoman, As always, your logic defies logic.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 3:16pm@Van Bones
Lets walk this through,
Of the 34 witnesses, 9 saw the shooting, 7 of the 9 eye witnesses to the actual shooting recant their testimony, 1 of the eye witnesses is a potenial suspect himself. There is no physical evidence, no confessiona, no murder weapon. The case was not strong. A republican Governor of Ill, suspended executions after several death row inmates were found to be innocent. What is a greater injustice the potential that a gulity man has his sentence commuted to life in prison or that an innocent man is killed and the guilty remain free.
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 4:13pm@encinom
what makes libs love criminal turds so much?
He was a career criminal. Only 9 needed to testify. and none recanted testomony in court. The supreme court looked at it, and evon Obummer looked at it, and none saw fit to save this garbage.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 4:37pmrangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 4:13pm
@encinom
what makes libs love criminal turds so much?
He was a career criminal. Only 9 needed to testify. and none recanted testomony in court. The supreme court looked at it, and evon Obummer looked at it, and none saw fit to save this garbage.
Report Post »_______________________________
Actually, Obama (you mis-spelled his name again Ranger Dan), has no power over the execution. His power to grant pardons extends to Federal Crimes, not State. And why the Christian bloodlust, hy is it that those that professor the follow Christ the most have the largest desire to kill? Given the questions raised in this case, would life in prison be a mischarge of Justice? The Governor of Ill, decided that it was better for the gulity to have their sentences commuted to life in prison, then an innocent be put to death, after a parade of convictions were overturned for Death Row inmates.
rangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 6:11pm@encinom
I not only have a christian bloodlust for murder, I would also like the death penalty for first degree rape, child molestation, or third felony. Back in the day we hung people for stealing a mans horse, now you can rape his daughter, do a few years of easy time with no work, color tv, and be back out doing it again.
Look at it this way. Troy aint killing no one else. If we could have hung him back in his own hood, perhaps some of those in his hood would find a new line of work, and stop with the crime.
liberal criminal justice has never worked, and never will. We started implementing the new wave lib crap back in the 60s, and things have never been the same
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 6:13pmIf you think I have a bloodlust, I will word it this way.
If I could go to the local prison, you could line up the murderers, rapist, childmolesters, and sodomites, lay their head on a stump, and I will take a twelve pound sledge hammer, and bust their evil heads like grapes.
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 6:13pmafter busting a head like I grape, I would have but one thing to say.
“next”
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 6:22pmballistic evidence presented at trial linked bullets recovered at or near the scene to those at another shooting in which Davis was also charged
On November 15, 1989, a grand jury indicted Davis for murder, assaulting Larry Young with a pistol, shooting Michael Cooper, obstructing MacPhail in performance of his duty and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime
By a 4–3 margin the Georgia Supreme Court rejected the challenge, stating once again that Davis should have raised the issue earlier in the appeal process.[50]
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 6:58pmOkay Ranger Dan, a little more for your to chew on:
“Darrell Collins, who had made an August 1989 police statement that he had seen Davis shoot at people in a car in Cloverdale and approaching MacPhail, recanted his statement under cross-examination by the defense, saying that he made the statement after threats by police with prison if he did not cooperate. He said in court that he had not seen Davis in possession of a gun or fire one.[26] No murder weapon – neither the gun owned by Cole nor that said to be owned by Davis – was ever recovered.[29] A ballistics expert testified that the .38 caliber bullet that killed MacPhail could have been fired from the same gun that wounded Cooper at the Cloverdale pool party, though he admitted doubt about this. “
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 7:07pmAlso Ranger Dan, since 1973 138 prisoner, on death row have been found innocent. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row
Where in the Bible does it justify the killing of an innocent man? As doubts are raised about guilt, is it not the duty of the those sworn to uphold justice to conduct further investigations? And when did Christ preach the gospel of Capital Punishment? TO many Christians seem to eager to kill. Also who are these sodomites you speak of? Have you extended capital punishment beyond crimes and into enforcing your own morals?
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:34pm@ENCINOM
Your 138 found innocent is a crock of poo. My first degree is in Criminal Justic and Pre Law. I studied this out numerous times, and there is not one that was found innocent. Lots of bleeding heart stories though.
I have no desire for any innocent man to die. On the flip side of the coin, our justice system is so just, that there a 100x over the ammount of guilty folks that walk free. O.J. for one.
Troy Davis was a criminal. The supreme court looked at it, the Gov looked at it, and still did not see fit to stop his execution. Life is short, make what you can of it, while you can. He was on the run from the law from the start. He knew why he was running. Troy is in one of two places, and you and I will be in one of those two places in a few blinks of the eye. I know to which I will go, hope the same is true for you.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:29pmSorry, Ranger Dan, those 138 men were EXONERATED. The point still stands, how many other innocent men have been killed at the hands of the State? The system is deeply flawed. The greater injustice is the death of an innocent man.
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:33pm@encinom
MIss read your last post. Yes, plenty of folks found guilty were later exonerated. DNA helped some.
How many folks have been put to death, then proved innocent? To my knowledge it has not happened. One time, is to many, but no system is perfect. Once again, we have the most just justice system in the world, and I would argue in the history of the world. Our legal system is thorough, and has many safety catches. It is not perfect, but show me one in the world that is better.
Plenty of libs knock our system, then want to defend the islamic folks. go see how fare their system is.
Report Post »rangerp
Posted on September 28, 2011 at 10:47am@encinom
Report Post »Go check out your socialist and communist nations, and see how just their systems are.
JLGunner
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:35amToo many people are watching CSI and believe it to be true. Now evrybody thinks there needs to be some nerd in a lab somewhere uncovering some blockbuster micro-evidence.
Report Post »eat-more-bacon-USA
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:29amThe execution of murderer Troy Davis proves that our justice system is the most perfect, imperfect system in the world. Davis should have been executed twenty years ago, but ultimately justice has prevailed. Troy Davis’ life of violent crime has finally come to an end.
Report Post »GERATMO
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:26amEyewitness testimony is very important in solving cases. Sometimes its flawed but if something happened to my family and someone saw it, I would hope it be credible in court. If you abbolish eyewitness testimony then I think it works in the criminals favor.
Report Post »bigdaddyt46
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:18am@porkay78
many many many sections of the bible deal with capitol punishment. God’s law states IF YOU TAKE A LIFE, SO SHALL YOUR LIFE BE TAKEN. when Jesus said ” you have heard it said an eye for an eye, but i say turn they other cheek.” he wasn’t talking about murders here. back in Jesus’ time and before when soeone committed a crime against you you had the right to do the exact same thing to the criminal that he did to you. an eye for an eye. you you take someone’s life that God created, then your punishment is death. as far as abortion goes the women and doctors should face murder charges. the SCOTUS was only hable to pass that law(as well as sleep at night) by de-humanizing the child in the womb by calling it a blob. yet if someone kills a woman who is pregnant, miraculousy the “blob” counts as a human bringing extra charges to the criminal. i here women all the time(my sister included) when parts of the bible are said pertaining to women “oh that was the old times that doesn’t mean that today” yet i haven‘t seen anywhere in the bible that says God’s laws have an expiration date. God‘s law is God’s law plain and simple. even if we do not understand him in all aspects(no human can fully understand God and his plans) to openly go against his will, and laws is condeming oneself to eternal damnation.
ok i’ll get out of the pulpit now, and have another cup of joe :D
Report Post »aggiebrewer
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:00amSo tell me Big daddy…..How are you the authority on what Jesus MEANT?
Report Post »What you state is your interpretation of turn the other cheek. Be careful not to assume your opinion is sacrosanct.
barrycooper
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:09amUnless you perceive your career as that of partisan activist, you really ought to rethink your profession. Either do it right, or don’t do it at all. Your entire article leads people to think that the evidence against Davis consisted in one or two people who may or may not have seen him. In reality, he was seen by MANY people, having shot the police officer once, then walked up to his prostrate body and shot him AGAIN at point blank range. Some of the witnesses were people who knew him personally.
Ann Coulter does her job here: http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2011/09/21/mumias_the_word/page/2
Report Post »aggiebrewer
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 10:01amGreat points using FACTS about the case and how it was prosecuted. Good on you.
Report Post »gramma b
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 11:13amThank you Barry. I have concerns about the Blaze. This was supposed to be the place where people actually researched and got to the truth. The author of this story should have read the trial transcript, and the actual lawyer-drafted affidavits “recanting.” Ann Coulter did. Instead, the author of this story just accepts the reporters’ version of things.
Report Post »TomFerrari
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:09amRESPONSIBILITY.
We need to raise a new generation of Americans that are RESPONSIBLE. That take DUTY and HONOR and MORALS and ETHICS seriously.
The humanism movement has yielded situational ethics, which has created a gerneration or two of people that cannot discern right and wrong without assistance / guidance.
RESPONSIBILITY, and ACCOUNTABILITY are the keys.
If you wrongly accuse someone of a crime, you are charged AND PROSECUTED for filing a false police report. I think this is possible now, but, it is not prosecuted adequately.
Report Post »Perhaps a reverse Miranda Rights for witnesses?
“If you make a false statement, you WILL BE CHARGED and PROSECUTED in a court of law.”
Or something like that.
MySacredHonor
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:38amThere is a clear and simple difference between abortion and the Death penalty… the infant has committed no crime, and broken no law but is put to death for convenience, the convicted person has committed a crime and most likely killed another person. Putting the first to death in unconscionable, but putting the second to death is rational. Some call it cruel and unusual, but what is more cruel? locking a man in a cell like an animal for 20-30-40-60 years? or giving him a clean death? if he/she did the crime he/she should be punished, the only question here is which punishment is warranted, and which is “cruel and Unusual”…
Report Post »HowardSternIsABigot
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:14amJust to muddy the waters a little more…death penalties set by the states I believe. I question right of outsiders to impose their morality on a whole state. Shouldnt the state where the crime is committed have the right to enforce its own laws? I think so, even when I disagree the law itself.
Report Post »SamIamTwo
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:28amIn the Anthony Porter case, the actual killer confessed.
Interesting read on Troy Davis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Davis_case
Report Post »MySacredHonor
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 12:55pmUM not to be too picky, but where on that massive wall of text dose it say someone else confessed? i read about 3/4 of, and found Nothing about anyone confessing. please help us out here by atleast giving us a paragraph to look for…
Report Post »JRserious
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:26amDavis also had another conviction for shooting another man in the face earlier the same day, with the same gun. what about all the ballistics evidence, the bloodied shorts recovered at his home that prosecutors offered to have DNA tested, (when that tecnology became availabel, THE DEFENSE REFUSED TO ALLOW THE TEST only to use lack of DNA as an arguement in appeal. appeal after appeal after appeal, more than any inmate in U.S. history -in a liberal court system- all denied because once you read the prosecutions case and the lame defense arguments you know beyond the shadow of a doubt that troy davis pistol whipped a homeless man and murdered a Police Officer, then fled to Atlanta while a manhunt ensued. Davis’ sister should have been arrested for aiding a felony murder suspect in evading police or at minimum obstruction. These witnesses only changed their testimony after being approached by attourneys with amnesty international. they should be charged with perjury. liberal reporters that ignore case evidence and stir citizens into a frenzy will have blood on their hands when something like this blows up into a riot. they can talk about a plane crash with a gleam in their eyes.
Report Post »decendentof56
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:41amTroy was guilty, just like Abu Jamal was /is guilty of the murder of officer Daniel Faulkner . Daniel’s widow has been through hell with all the appeals, led by hollywood idiots like the late Ed Asner.
Report Post »dadsrootbeer
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:20amFunny how nobody is talking about this guys violent criminal past with a hand gun. If you don’t want to go to jail and possibly get the death penalty DON”T COMMIT CRIMES.
Report Post »tequilamockingbird
Posted on September 29, 2011 at 7:46pmA violent criminal past with a handgun has nothing to do with this specific case. Either he‘s guilty or he’s innocent; one way or the other, past behavior is irrelevant.
Report Post »let us prey
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:16amI have read many stories on the internet about this case. It seems that the public is pushing to end the death penalty altogether. To me It seems unfair to the tax payer to finance someone who is condemned to a life sentence or death penalty. The cost for a prisoner for one year in a detention facility is outrageous. I am unsure if life imprisonment is punishment for the criminal or the tax payer.
Report Post »Leader1776
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:49amAccording to a review of the transcipts by Ann Coulter there were not 1 or 2, 6 or 8, but 20+ eyewitnesses (all black). Three were in the Air Force. Seven recanted following the trial. Regarding eyewitness testimony ………. in this case it seems solid.
Another case that brings out the anti-death penalty folks ……… the same folks that say its OK to kill the innocents by the millions. Ah ……. Sanger and Singer, what a pair.
Report Post »let us prey
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 9:01amleader
Report Post »It sure is a pair. A pair of ……….
encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:36pmSo we should kill prisoners because it will save tax payer’s money. Basically, the phoney charge of death panels the Tea Party levelled against Obama, you want true death panels to save teh Koch brothers a couple of pennies. Do the GOP, Tea Party and right wing Christians value life?
Report Post »tequilamockingbird
Posted on September 29, 2011 at 5:53pmLeader 1776: Ann Coulter is lying.
Yeah, I know, you don’t want to hear that. But here‘s the excerpt from Coulter’s article: “First of all, the state presented 34 witnesses against Davis — not nine — which should give you some idea of how punctilious the media are about their facts in death penalty cases.”
As the Wikipedia article says, there were 7 eyewitnesses and 2 who claim Davis confessed the murder to them, and 7 of the 9 later recanted their testimony in sworn affidavits. THERE WERE 34 WITNESSES — not eyewitnesses — for the prosecution: an entirely different thing, as Coulter knows perfectly well. Witnesses are people who present evidence in court, and include police officers, doctors, the coroner, ballistic or other experts, etc.
Report Post »aggiebrewer
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:13amI find it hard to support the death penalty. I am a proud Texan and I used to be all for it. Then it occured to me that by sanctioning its use we are allowing the state to kill people. We say we support limiting the power of government in so many ways but we want them to have the ability to kill citizens. This just does not add up for me any longer. Pro Life is Pro Life. I know I will take heat for this position but I am prepared to stand in those flames.
Report Post »porkay78
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:19amYES ! I am standing with you on this with one.
Report Post »HowardSternIsABigot
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:12amAccording to the article by Coulter the facts are really not questionable. This guy was there doing bad things to people and shot a guy. Witnesses saw him that knew him. Recanters should be examined and if they lied at original trial they should be in prison for perjury. What am I missing? Maybe threats or bribes involved? America is doomed if the news media cant explain a few simple truths without letting race determine your standard of honesty.
Report Post »Mandors
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:07am@Biohazard23
Another brilliant argument! Tell me, what crime does an unborn commit? Did the unborn have the right to an attorney and present evidence at a trial?
Hmmm, seems people haven’t had their coffee yet this morning.
Report Post »porkay78
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:15amBiohazard is just pointing out the narrow view of left versus right. The right wants no abortion but favors a strong death penalty. The left wants abortion and and does not want the death penalty. Both views are not consistant with the teaching of Jesus and therefore in my opinion both views are wrong.
Report Post »biohazard23
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:18amThe point I was making is that these people screaming about how wrong the death penalty is seem to have zero problems with dismembering unborn babies simply because said baby is an “inconvenience” and a “burden” to the mother. They bitterly cling to the “right” for a woman to use murder as a form of birth control, yet they freak out when a convicted killer is sentenced to death. They seem to feel that all the deranged killer really needs is a therapist and a few hugs and voila! He’s rehabilitated.
You are correct: the baby committed no crime and receives no counsel to represent him yet is given the harshest penalty because someone decided that it’s simply too much hassle to let him live. The baby does not receive a jury trial or get to have his side of the story made known. The murderer does, and THOSE are the people the anti-death penalty and liberal crowd wish to protect, not an innocent unborn child.
That, and I haven’t had any coffee yet this morning. :)
Report Post »biohazard23
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:25amSo, porky, there should be no criminal punishment since we are all imperfect beings who are stained by original sin? Is that your argument? We should not hold our fellow citizens accountable when their lack of morals and compassion deprive another person of property or life? Really?? When someone does something so heinous that it’s beyond the comprehension of normal, law-abiding citizens, we have no place to judge or to condemn because, based on your interpretation of the Bible, you don’t think we should? Wow. Just….. wow.
You claim that we should not sit in judgment yet that’s exactly what you are doing with your argument. You are judging others so wouldn’t that make you a hypocrite? Just sayin’.
Time for my coffee.
Report Post »Mandors
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:41amYeah, I could use another cup myself.
That said, I see a dichotomy between abortion and the death penalty. That the latter is contrary to Christianity is a recent invention. I also strongly disagree with Porkay78′s assertion that “Punishment” in Romans (see other thread) did not include or mean putting someone to death. The penal system in the Roman Empire employed capital punishment rather liberally, if you recall. Paul and his audience were painfully aware of this fact.
Report Post »Mandors
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:04amIf I recall, the key piece of evidence was the murder weapon which Davis used in robbery.
Report Post »Hmmm, maybe he shouldn’t have done the first crime.
encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:38pmNo murder weapon was recovered, hard to be a key piece of evidence.
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:02am.
Report Post »We should enforce the Death Penalty within one year of conviction. Within that time you better find a witness or Jesus……..
SamIamTwo
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 7:56amI think you should at least have as many eyewitnesses that the bible requires.
Report Post »porkay78
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 7:46amLet he who is without sin cast the first stone…..the death penalty needs to be abolished!
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 7:56amAs long as you’re using the Bible to push your agenda, try this on for size:
Report Post »Romans 13:4
The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong.
biohazard23
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 7:58amBut you probably support abortion, right?
Report Post »SamIamTwo
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 7:59amDo you recall what that was about? Do you need a bible lesson today. There are other verses for dealing with people who commit crimes…
Report Post »Mandors
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:02amWhat a moronic argument, by you’re thinking there can never be criminal punishment. Great idea.
Report Post »porkay78
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:07am@Gonzo: Ah but punish does Not mean to put someone to death.. The rule of law you state in your reading is in the same vein as the law said to stone to death a prostitute, gee funny how Jesus enforced that law. And then their he is forgiving 7 times 70, or telling of the the prodical son and even Luke 9:51-56 where his disciples want to “cal down fire from heaven” on a village and yet Jesus says no. Time and time again Jesus preached accountability with love and forgiveness rather than revenge and power/ego driven justice.
Report Post »Rickfromillinois
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:37amSo when I break into your house, rob you, and then just for fun beat on you for a while, don’t Judge me.
Report Post »Nepenthe
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:53am‘by you’re thinking there can never be criminal punishment…’
No, by what Jesus did here, the thinking is that we should not be putting these people to death since, in the eyes of God, you, me, and every other person that has ever existed is as equally as sinnful as the criminal.
Report Post »rose-ellen
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 11:49amUnless you‘re a pacifist you’re being hypocritical.We kill innocent people all the time when we drop bombs on villages and cities .Saying we feel bad that innocent people get killed with our bombs falling on them-does not take away from our responsibility in choosing to drop lethal bombs on populated areas. That killing innocent people is acceptable but not killing murderers tells me that anti-death penalty people are complicit with the notion of might makes right.only the strong survive- thessurvival of the fittest,the strong over the weak-all that is a legacy of our animal nature and the antithesis of what it means to be human-unlike animals governed by instincts we choose and are free and responsible for out ethical choices] A country that does NOT have capital punishment for premeditated murdererrs is uncivilized and inhuman. Life in prison without parole is also inhuman. Killing someone as a punishment for choosing to murder a defenseless person is justice. A civilized society is obligated to stand for the defenselss victim and not let the stronger man[the murderer] remaining standing.
Report Post »aggiebrewer
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 12:03pmYou are using the bible incorrectly in your statement here in my opinion. We are to be respectors of law not men. While I agree we should not judge, I believe this line from is in relation to salvation not guilt or innocence in criminal or civil cases.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on September 27, 2011 at 8:41pmGonzo
Report Post »Posted on September 27, 2011 at 7:56am
As long as you’re using the Bible to push your agenda, try this on for size:
Romans 13:4
The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong.
_____________________________________________
But our government officials have never been God’s servants. they are elected by the people to represent the people. So Should they be replaced with Priests and clergy? Which Faith and why are you using something that sounds like it can come straight from the Koran and Sharia law?