Mike, kindly read my comments addressed to Cat below. When I first read some of these articles, I had many of the same questions you have but instead of relying on the newspaper writers to capsulize the state of this case, I went on line and looked up the actual trial transcripts, the hearing results, the Supreme Court rulings and especially the 171 page decision of the federal court in 2010. When you're done, you will most likely never trust what you read in the newspaper again because what they have led people to believe is that 7 people recanted. They didn't.

Just one recanted his entire testimony; however, at the original trial, his testimony was so unbelieveable that the jury knew he was lying and gave it no weight to begin with. Two of the others basicly stated that Davis admitted to them that he was the shooter. They now say they lied. Unfortunaltely for Davis, all that does is just eliminate them from the issue. It doesn't mean Davis wasn't the shooter, just that he supposedly didn't confess it to them. Also, they could be lying now and Davis did actually confess at the time that he was the killer. They were not eyewitnesses.

Two others have said that, if they were pressed now, they couldn't positively ID Davis now. That is completely different than saying they either misidentified him at the time or that they actually saw someone else kill the officer. To this day not one eyewitness has ever said that anyone else was the shooter. Two people have not recanted at all and the at least two of the witnesses who have allegedly recanted in affidavit form were given the opportunity to appear at the 2010 hearing. Even though they were present at the courthouse, Davis chose not to call them to give direct testimony. The court could only surmised that under cross examination their recantations would not have been believeable.

Everything I have read regarding the facts and the subsequent hearing transcripts have not convinced me that there is any reasonable doubt in Davis' conviction and sentence.

Those responsible for this man's death will have to live with their conscience once he is found to have been innocent all along. Have a good night sleep ya'll.

There are times I wish I could believe in the death penalty, but that would mean having a total trust in a judicial system that operates without bias and provides a quality defense no matter the financial status of the defendant. We are far from that ideal, therefore I cannot encourage death for people based on subjective testimony.

I think an equally horrible crime was committed by Wall St when their fraudulent practices so severely damaged an economy that people were thrown out of work, lost savings, and then their homes. Many of these people, so distressed to see everything they'd work for gone, took their lives, unable to endure the agony of loss.

Somehow I don't think life in prison is any gift. I'm sure it would drive me insane. But killing a person, especially without a range of irrefutable evidence, is abhorrent to me.

I want to know how do I find the actual court documents that has been said is on the internet.

I am not opponent or proponent of capital punishment, but one thing in the official court document puzzled me for a while now. After the court proceeding, Troy Davis addressed the jury and said "Spare my life. Just give me a second chance. That's all I ask." Why would someone who has supposedly not committed this heinous crime say that? Did he misspoke? Or was he honestly asking for forgiveness for the crime committed.

Mike, you really sound like you think that people should have to prove their innocence. First-time negative testimony that is subsequently changed means there is less evidence of guilt.

The other disturbing feature is that the unfortunate policeman's family wanted someone to die. They could not possibly know whether Davis did it or not, but they did just want another killing in return - and it would appear that the quicker that happened the better, regardless of guilt or innocence. I am sorry for their loss and heartache, but bad cess upon them for their shallowness.

So what else is new? Just another poor, innocent Black man executed by KKK "justice". Ho hum! But, in reference to one of the posts, if "they were not eyewitnesses", then why were they allowed to perjure themselves in order that the crackers could secure their bogus conviction? I guess that what they do when they have no forensic evidence linking the suspect to the crime, especially when the victim was White and the suspect is Black.

Lying under oath, in a case like this, should mean YOU get the perp's punishment (and equal time in prison). That might make some people stick closer to the truth.

Thanks Aldo! I never fully trust what I read in the media, that is why I ask questions on these forums. As I said earlier, we will never know if he was guilty or innocent at this point. The only way to truly be innocent is to not be involved in evil deeds to begin with. Too many people are crucified for association alone.

Be careful of the company you keep and the reputation you cultivate as it could one day be the deciding factor in whether you live or die.

Catchick: Actually, he has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. At least 4 times. First at his original trial. 2 more times before the pardons board. The Supreme Court has looked this case twice and a Federal Appeals Court in 2010 essentially gave him the new trial he was seeking. In each of these cases Davis has had the opportunity to show his innocence either by showing he didn't do it or by showing that someone else did. He has never been able to do that. As a matter of fact, the 2010 hearing in federal court was ordered by the US Supreme Court. In that hearing, every witness in Davis' favor was given the opportunity to testify including any of the witnesses who supposedly recanted their testimony. Each and every witness was either discredited in terms of what they say now compared to what they testified to at the original trial or their stories made no material change in the crux of their testimony which was that Davis was the killer. In addition, one of the witnesses who testified and gave an affidavit "recanting" his testimony actually further pointed the finger at Davis.

Cat, don't just read this article to form your opinion or assume that because the pope and some Hollywood celebrities have jumped on the bandwagon that this guy hasn't somehow had his day (or several) in court. Read the trial transcript, the hearing decisions and especially the 171 page decision of the appeals court where each and every bit of evidence and witness testimony was scrutinized and all have come to the same conclusion. Guilty. As another matter of fact, in the eyes of the court in 2010, Davis "didn't even come close" to establishing that if the trial were held today there would be a different outcome.

No need to tell me what to read, how to read an article, or form my opinions, Aldo....I have read them and I also understand that witnesses have changed their testimonies, one juror is doubting her decision, and one person came forward claiming that someone (named) confessed to the shooting. That is not "beyond reasonable doubt". And to assume that I am starry-eyed because of the celebrity attention this case has attracted is insulting. Very smug individual, aren't you?

He is clearly innocent, if anyone read the story, they would realize that Sylvester Redd Coles was the actual killer. He had the gun (which he claimed he gave away earlier in the day), he was the first person to finger Davis (he also brought his attorney with him when he did it), and he was the one fighting with the homeless guy that started the chain of events. So anyone saying he is guilty is either an idiot, or they just don't care if an innocent person gets death. The only thing putting him there, is witness' who recanted their original testimony (except for Sylvester Redd who still insists that Davis did it, coincidence?). So everyone needs to stop being so self righteous in this country and free this guy. As for the family, they are no better than the actual killer, by hoping to see this guy die.

That's the problem Steve, your reading the story.

-No eyewitness ever, at any stage has stated that Coles was the shooter.

-Coles was not the first person to finger Davis. There were at least 4 people between the time of the shoooting, around 1:00am and 5:00am the same night who came forward and gave statements to the police as to who the shooter was. Coles arrived much later with his attorney.

- Yes, Coles was the guy fighting with the homeless man; however, every witness (and none have changed their version on this point) stated that it was not the man (Coles) who was originally fighting with the homeless man who was the killer. They have further stated and not recanted that it was the guy (Davis) who snuck up behind the homeless guy and struck him in the head with a gun and who eventually ran from Officer McPhail and then turned and shot McPhail.

And Cat, I'm not being smug at all, only that the more you write the more it is apparent that you know very little of the actual facts of this case and the more you're relying on what the newpapers and MSNBC and others would like you to believe what the "facts" are. I, no more than anyone else want to see an innocent man be given the death penalty. I just believe that, in this case, Davis is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt

-

And also Cat, the supposed juror who is doubting her decision has never once appeared at any hearing, given any sworn testimony as to her changing her mind nor does it appear she has ever made a statement to the Georgia pardons board about her feelings. Just who is this mystery juror?

Read my lips: No evidence linking Davis. Just a muddle of half-truths and lies from alleged witnesses. Who had the gun? The guy who reported Davis. As long as the witnesses had not recanted, the courts could not ignore their testimony. Now it's likely too late. Still, enough doubt to retract the death warrant. You can't get through on the phone now, to either the D.A. or the judge. They've got their man and they intend to lynch him.

Cat I am with you, not knocking what Aldo has read but too many stories have been changed everytime his case went to trial. Reasonable doubt was raised when a witness recanted his or her story, and because the claim is that Davis was convicted in a earlier shooting he shoot the officer based on shady witnesses and shell casings...WOW!!

He did it. Suck it up!

How many appeals did the officer who died get? How many attorneys represented him before his death? How many people kept all night vigils for him before his death? How many people held marches and protests for him before his death?? How many judges reviewed his case before he died? Did he have 22 years? As Da Bosun said "He did it. Suck it up!"

Aldo - thanks for taking the time to dig into the actual source documents in this case. I hope that you or someone publishes an article or book that examines Mr. Davis' conviction in depth. In the meantime, I'd like your opinion on the people who claim that Redd Coles confessed to being the shooter.

And those of you who are convinced he is innocent (even though you were not on the jury) how do you deal with the fact that earlier in the day Troy Davis shot another man in the face at a pool party in front of witnesses, left an empty shell casing at the scene and a matching shell casing was found at the scene of the murdered policeman?

THe man he was supposed to have shot "Cooper" testified at the trial that Davis didn't shoot him. I also wonder how Davis shot him without a gun. The only 38 caliber gun ever talked about during the trial was the one that killed the officer, and the only person who was known to own one was the witness "Coles" who told police Davis killed the officer. Coles even admitted ownong such a weapon, but said he had loaned it to a friend or lost it. According to "young" the original homeless man being beaten, it was Coles who was beating him. The bullet casing found at the scene was retrieved 2 or 3 days after the event, again by a passerby, and given to the police. The case has more holes than a sieve.

doesn't matter who was beating the homeless man. It only matters that when the off-duty officer came to his aid, that someone in that group shot the officer.

Agree. Now, who shot the officer?

Frank, there's no physical evidence connecting Troy Davis to either shooting. The two shell casings were actually apparently not a match (or at the very least, they were certainly never conclusively shown to be a match), and it's not clear that they were even from the bullets used in the crimes. And there's no evidence that Troy Davis ever owned a gun that matched the bullets or the shell casings, but Redd Coles, who was arguably the more logical suspect since he was the one who was actually arguing with the homeless person that MacPhail came to assist, did have a gun of the same caliber (which was never recovered, because he claimed that he gave it away.)

One of the 2 witnesses that didn't recant or change their testimony was Redd Coles, who's very possibly the shooter himself, and hence his testimony needs to be taken with a grain of salt, to say the least. I don't know anything about the other witness who didn't change or recant their testimony.

And no one is saying that his innocence is a "slam dunk". The issue is just that there's a lot of doubt about his guilt, and for many (most?) people it's profoundly immoral to execute someone when this level of doubt about their guilt exists.

@Letusreason.

The only factual information in your post is the record of the judicial systems review findings.

The part that bothers me is that you catagorize the people who don't want to see Davis put to death as opponents to the death penalty and black activists, which is not a reasonable statement considering there are people on this thread that have stated they are for the death penalty and against the putting to death of Davis. It should also be noted that there have been other advocates for the death penalty speaking out against this outside of this thread. Besides you using speculation about the way they would act you actually use the phrase "If they were confronted with absolute evidence of guilt...", which leads me to believe that you yourself don't think that the evidence that has been given is absolute.

Aside from interjecting your own speculation as to peoples agenda (which is not allowed in court), you fail to show any ability to administer justice in your own mind. By declaring people partial based on your speculation you remove any ability to examine their questions objectively and base it on your speculation. That means if you were convicted for violating any law, you feel, whether you are truly innocent or not, that you should get whatever sentence they hand you, and you would have no problem with that. Somehow, and I get it that I'm speculating, I think you would be outraged.

The judicial system is not perfect and it won't be because humans created it. The US's judicial system is one of the best in the world. But it still has flaws and we should be ever working to make it better. It is still righteous to have faith in the system and still want to improve it.

The problem is the paucity of actual evidence that he is GUILTY. You have to remember that, if you execute Davis, you foreclose any chance of finding and convicting the person(s) who actually DID commit the crime.

Are you so certain of his guilt that 1) you are willing to take the irrevocable step of executing him and 2) you have no worries about the real killer being free?

The thought of every civilized person should be that the killing of an innocent man scares the crap out of them. But why do people seem to forget the innocent man that was executed by Davis? He is DEAD. His wife has been a widow for 22 years. His children have had no father for 22 years. All the while every conceivable and legal maneuver was used to prove Davis innocence and they failed. Why? Because our legal system, though flawed as it is, is still the best legal system in the world. Until someone comes up with a better one, I think it's time to serve justice once and for all in this trial. It was never about race, as some people always want to make it out to be when there are white and black people involved. It's about crime and punishment. End of story. Troy can try to lie his way into heaven, but I don't think that's going to work either.

This is the sort of illogical thinking that leads to innocent people being convicted and possibly executed. Obviously an innocent police offer was killed and that's horrible, but no matter how horrible the crime, that doesn't mean that you convict a person, or execute them, when there appears to be reasonable doubt about their guilt. You always have to separate the desire to want to punish someone for a crime from your evaluation of what the evidence is. In this case, the evidence for this person's guilt is very weak, and that's why this case has gotten so much attention. Based on the evidence, this is a person who probably should have never been convicted in the first place, let alone executed. And executing an innocent person---if that's what has happened here---certainly does nothing in terms of achieving justice for the police officer who was killed.

Paul Begala -- Your comment is racist and sickening. Criminals and bad people come in all colors of the rainbow. Not all Black people are "bad" -- just like not all White people are "good". (Let us not forget Casey Anthony, Warren Jeffs, pedophile priests, embezzlers, other serial murderes, etc., ad nauseum who happen to be "White" in color.) Would you prefer these type of "upstanding" people move into your neighborhood because they are White? A police officer was murdered and the responsible person most definitely should pay -- just like the "upstanding" White garbage executed today in Texas for the dragging murder of the Black man.

Mr. Begala - congratulations for having the courage to recognize reality.

1ad - you completely miss the point. Mr. Begala does not assert that all all black people are bad or all white people are good. The fact is that black males commit a hugely disproportionate share of murders in this country. It is also incontrovertible that the post-colonial history of sub-Saharan Africa is an unending story of civil wars, rape, mutilation and murder. It's time to connect the dots and acknowledge that Africans are by nature more violent than whites or asians.

You're confusing different meanings of the word "witness". Everyone who testifies at a trial is referred to as a "witness", but that doesn't mean they actually witnessed the crime. There were apparently 9 people who claimed they saw Davis at the scene of the crime, but 7 of them later changed or recanted their testimony. And one of the 2 witnesses who didn't change or recant their testimony was Redd Coles, who may have been the actual shooter, so his testimony is of course highly suspect.

"Who does he say did it?" This should be obvious if you've read anything about the case. There was a man named Redd Coles who was arguing with the homeless person that the police officer, MacPhail, came to help. It would make sense for him to be the shooter, since he was arguing with the person the officer came to help, and he had a gun of the same caliber as the one that was used in the crime. (Conveniently, he claimed that he gave the gun away and it was never found.) He was also the first person to point the finger at Troy Davis, and one of only 2 witnesses against Davis who didn't change or recant their testimony. So clearly we have a very viable 2nd suspect in this case.

Troy Davis had years of trials NC guy-4152005. Do you really think they were all unfair? Please.....

Xknows I don't know how to say this any more gently...........get off the computer and sign up for a community college course. Your spelling is horrific. The benefits to you would be immeasurable!