
U.S. Supreme Court orders new hearing for Troy
Davis
Condemned killer on death row for murder of off-duty
police officer
By Bill Rankin
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Troy Davis
|
Georgia
death-row inmate Troy Anthony Davis has long insisted
that, given another day in court, he could prove he did not kill a
Savannah police officer 20 years ago.
On Monday, in an extraordinary order unlike any it has issued in almost
half a century, the U.S. Supreme Court gave Davis such a chance.
The high court ordered a federal judge in the Southern District of
Georgia to hear testimony that could not have been obtained at the time
of Davis’ 1991 trial and decide whether this new evidence “clearly
establishes” his innocence in the death of Officer Mark Allen MacPhail.
Davis’ sister, Martina Correia, said she was
overjoyed.
“Finally, it’s going to happen,” she said. “I know that a lot of people
still think Troy is guilty. But I know that executing him will not
bring justice for Officer MacPhail. I truly believe Troy is innocent.”
|
The slain officer’s mother, Anneliese MacPhail, was in
shock.
“I was really hoping they’d deny this appeal, not just shove it off to
somewhere else,” she said, noting Wednesday is the 20th anniversary of
her son’s death. “I would like it to come to an end.”
As for Davis, she said, “If you tell yourself for 20 years you didn’t
do it, you start to believe it. I’m still convinced he did it.”
The high court’s decision gave yet another reprieve to Davis, whose
life already had been spared three times shortly before his scheduled
execution. If the court had rejected Davis’ latest request, the Chatham
County district attorney was expected to seek a new execution date.
Davis’ innocence claims have attracted international attention and
support. Former President Jimmy Carter and Pope Benedict XVI have said
Davis should not be executed. In May, 27 former justices, judges and
prosecutors filed a legal brief asking the high court to let a federal
judge hear Davis’ claims.
Davis sits on death row for the 1989 killing of MacPhail, who was
off-duty. MacPhail, 27, was shot multiple times after he responded to
the wails of a homeless man being pistol-whipped in a Burger King
parking lot.
Since the 1991 trial, seven of nine key prosecution witnesses have
recanted their testimony. This includes recantations from witnesses who
testified they saw Davis shoot and kill MacPhail.
Others have come forward and said another man, Sylvester “Redd” Coles,
has admitted to them he was the killer. Coles, who denied shooting
MacPhail, was at the scene and the first person to implicate Davis.
In Monday’s decision, Justice John Paul Stevens noted that no state or
federal court has convened a hearing and heard the new testimony and
assessed its reliability. “The substantial risk of putting an innocent
man to death clearly provides an adequate justification for holding an
evidentiary hearing,” Stevens wrote. He was joined by Justices Ruth
Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, issued a
vigorous dissent. He noted that the Georgia Supreme Court, the state
Board of Pardons and Paroles and the federal appeals court in Atlanta
already reviewed and rejected Davis’ claims of innocence.
The high court, Scalia said, is ordering a hearing that is “a fool’s
errand” because Davis’ claim is “a sure loser.”
“Transferring his petition to the district court is a confusing
exercise that can serve no purpose except to delay the state’s
execution of its lawful criminal judgment,” Scalia said.
The decision noted that the court’s newest justice, Sonia Sotomayor,
did not participate in it. Nor did the decision indicate how Chief
Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito
voted. But at least two of them must have voted to grant Davis’ request
because a five-vote majority was needed for it to prevail.
The court also did not assign the case to a specific judge. Davis’
federal appeal was previously denied by a senior judge who has since
passed away. Once the case is formally transferred to the federal
courthouse in Savannah, it will likely be assigned to either Chief
Judge William T. Moore Jr. or Senior Judge B. Avant Edenfield, the
clerk of court, Scott Poff, said Monday.
Davis’ federal appeal was stifled by the federal Antiterrorism and
Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, passed by Congress to streamline
appeals. The statute makes it extremely difficult for death-row inmates
to present new evidence.
In Monday’s order, the high court did not specify what new evidence
could be presented at the upcoming hearing.
Stephen Bright of the Southern Center for Human Rights in Atlanta noted
that the order shifts the burden of proof onto Davis to show he was
innocent. “That’s a much more difficult proposition,” Bright said. “It
doesn’t mean it can’t be done, but it’s a significant burden to
overcome.”
New York attorney George Kendall, who also litigates death-penalty
cases, said a key victory for Davis is that a judge can finally hear
the testimony in open court, look the witnesses in the eyes, gauge
their credibility and decide if Davis’ claims have merit. To date, the
recantation testimony has been presented in sworn affidavits by the
state’s witnesses who say police, intent on getting Davis, intimidated
them into implicating him. Some of the witnesses also have testified in
closed hearings before the state parole board.
“If Troy Davis can persuade a district court judge that his witnesses
are credible, that enough of the recantations ring true and there may
be reason to believe the other guy was the real killer, I think he’s
got a shot at getting relief,” Kendall said. “If he can’t do that, he’s
got no shot.”
Tom Dunn, one of Davis’ attorneys, said, “Although the burden we face
is high, we are confident in Mr. Davis’ innocence and our evidence.”
Cornell University law professor John Blume said Monday’s decision
could indicate the high court may be ready to set a new precedent.
“This could be an important first step toward the court’s recognition
that it is unconstitutional to incarcerate or execute someone who is
actually innocent,” Blume said. “People might be surprised by that, but
the court has never recognized it.”
Scalia, who noted it had been almost 50 years since the high court took
the action it took on Monday, made note that the court “has never held
that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant”
who later convinced the courts he is “‘actually’ innocent.”
But Stevens responded by citing a dissent by Judge Rosemary Barkett of
the federal appeals court in Atlanta, who in April said Davis’ new
claims should be presented in open court. It “would be an atrocious
violation of our Constitution and the principles upon which it is
based” to execute an innocent person, Stevens wrote.
WHAT THE JUSTICES SAID
- Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justices Ruth
Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer: “The substantial risk of putting an
innocent man to death clearly provides an adequate justification for
holding an evidentiary hearing. ... Imagine a petitioner in Davis’
situation who possesses new evidence conclusively and definitively
proving, beyond any scintilla of doubt, that he is an innocent man. The
dissent’s reasoning would allow such a petitioner to be put to death
nonetheless.”
- Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Justice Clarence
Thomas: “The court proceeds down this path even though every judicial
and executive body that has examined petitioner’s stale claim of
innocence has been unpersuaded, and (to make matters worse) even though
it would be impossible for the District Court to grant relief. ...
Today, without explanation and without any meaningful guidance, this
court sends the District Court for the Southern District of Georgia on
a fool’s errand.”
Staff writer Larry Hartstein contributed to this article.
|