David Allen Green

A critical and liberal look at law and policy

The fourth attempt by the State of Georgia to execute Troy Davis

There is international concern at today’s planned execution.

By David Allen Green Published 21 September 2011 18:49

Troy Davis is due to be killed by officials of the State of Georgia in only a matter of hours. He will be strapped down and receive a lethal injection. This death has now been approved by the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles. This State Board, members of who boast of their involvement in religious activities in their on-line biographies, exists in part to authorise the deaths of their fellow human beings. Troy Davis is just the latest to have his execution approved.

The deliberate taking of life as any kind of punishment is wrong at all times, and in all circumstances. It does not matter if the execution is widely publicised or if it is not. And it also does not matter whether there has been some effort at due process, or no effort at propriety at all. As George Orwell describes in A Hanging, perhaps his most brilliant and moving essay, there is an "unspeakable wrongness" about the judicial taking of any life. All executions are vile; each one is absolutely wrong.

Nonetheless, the case of Troy Davis is widely regarded as exceptional, and it has attracted international attention and condemnation. There appear to have been serious irregularities in both the investigation and at trial. It is said that seven of the nine witnesses at the original trial have now recanted evidence and that someone else has confessed to the original crime. All these disturbing factors are emphasised in today's powerful editorial in the New York Times.

Today is now the fourth execution date that has been set for Troy Davis. Previously his life has been temporarily spared by operation of the criminal justice system. But there is only so far appeals can seek to check what seems to be an irresistible force of a process intent on ending life. And this is not some impersonal and abstract process: it is a sequence of decisions and non-decisions by identifiable people with moral agency.

Even if one adopts the horrific misconception of justice that a human life can somehow be taken as a punishment, this is surely not the sort of case where a person should be put to death. In the United States those in favour of capital punishment in principle ("as long as they are guilty") are speaking out against its application in this particular instance. It appears a man will die when there are well-grounded concerns as to his innocence: the State of Georgia is just going to kill him anyway.

Amnesty International has a campaign site for those who wish to try and prevent this execution which I encourage you to visit. An email in support may even make a difference. They may be a last-hour reprieve. But it does look as if the State of Georgia will kill Troy Davis at its fourth attempt.

David Allen Green is legal correspondent of the New Statesman. This blog also appears on Jack of Kent.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Execution

More from David Allen Green

60 comments

Fri, 2011-09-23 20:23 — Daniele1

Buckskins:
have some respect for people who have a different view from yours or you will sound like a troll with no arguments. I am not "a clown" because I am against the death penalty and I am no bleeding heart.
The only thing you have to make sure is that those killers never get out.This way at least if they are innocent they have a chance, if they are not, they will live a miserable life in prison (I believe worse than death in American prisons) Why kill them?
The argument that if you did a referendum tomorrow, the death penalty would be restored is no argument. If you asked people if they should pay taxes or not, I bet the majority (especially in America) would say no. Does that make it OK?

Fri, 2011-09-23 22:04 — Buckskins (not verified)

Your argument is plain silly. You also never miss an opportunity for a snide remark against my country. I'm not sure what your problem is other than out and out jealousy. In any event I wish no further interaction with you as I consider you a lost cause, and frankly quite sad.

Tue, 2011-09-27 00:07 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

Andyb: So if a man attacks you with a knife and he's already slashed you a couple of times, and you kill him trying to escape from him ...is that murder? So you don't approve of penalising the man with death in that circumstance?

Sat, 2011-09-24 02:21 — Daniele1

How terrible! no more interaction with Buckskin, with such an intellectual giant! my loss for sure!
My God I made "a snide (?) remark against his country" God forbid! me, a mere European, how dare I?
Jealousy?? That is a great one. What is there to be jealous about in your crumbling country? The crime rate? the number of crazy people? The political corruption? the total lack of real democracy? the horrendous gap between the poor and the obscenely rich? Your health system or rather your refusal to have one? the religious nutters who announce the end of the world every other day?
the drugs? the guns?
Sorry about this rant. Yes that is a rant but am fed up with these idiotic arrogant Americans who come on this site and can't bear to be criticised and who insult anybody who doesn't agree with their right-wing ideology. If you can't take criticism or sustain an argument, stick to American sites.
You are a real sad git.

Sat, 2011-09-24 03:30 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

@buckskins: " Texas has never executed a proven innocent individual"

Really? How much proof do you need? Take a close look at the case of Cammeron Willingham.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent

Sat, 2011-09-24 03:36 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

I know that most people in the UK want the death penalty but they haven't been properly informed of the consequences. Sometimes prison inmates do 'deals' with police to say that another prisoner had confessed. This was the case with Cammeron Willingham. And the forensic fire evidence was incorrect.

Looks like you've resumed your loving relationship with Daniele!

Sun, 2011-09-25 18:07 — Buckskins (not verified)

Mr D. I'm not at all saying this guy was innocent, but, if your saying innocents have been executed your right. That's how the cookie crumbles. Life is not fair and that's the world we live in. If I were on death row and innocent your darn right I would be pissed. Then again I'm married to one of the best lawyers in South Texas. The odd innocent being executed is the price paid for the greater good. Would you prefer an escaped murderer God forbid, kill your child, or a loved one? It happens.

Thu, 2011-09-22 22:44 — Nixon is Lord (not verified)

You need to celebrate your diversity. What about if you met an American from North Dakota or Hawaii? Would you give him/her a free pass-those states don't have the death penalty?
If you met an Iranian or a Kenyan, would you say "Stay away from me, barbarian with a death penalty!"
"Progressives"-tough where it's easy to see and where it's in countries like theirs. Everyone else gets a pass for "diversity" or "We don't want to force our values on them."

Thu, 2011-09-22 22:45 — Nixon is Lord (not verified)

BTW, how's that Mumia abu Jamal thing going? Don't hear so much about him anymore-and he was way more famous and "fashinable" than this guy whose case basically got fanned into flames by "activists" and "members of the Progressive community".

Tue, 2011-09-27 10:37 — john woods (not verified)

Read the excellent piece by Anne Coulter: "The Left's Latest Baby Seal" for a thorough debunking of everything EVERYTHING the author has quo
ted here re "doubts" as to Davis's innocence. I dunno why it is that when black criminals murder white police officers, the unthinking left just assums they are really wunnerful people. See Mumia mania.
o

Wed, 2011-09-21 19:55 — andrea (not verified)

I hope they show that they have a heart its awful if he gets executed,

Andrea from England, UK

Tue, 2011-09-27 11:40 — Andyb (not verified)

Mr Divine,

That would be self-defence, not an act of punishment or retribution. And before you ask, I support euthanasia for terminal patients who wish to die in dignity. Despite what the pro-lifers say, it isn't murder either.

Your initial question was about using death as a punishment. And I can add revenge and deterrent to that. In all cases, I consider this murder. And the execution of prisoners in the US is murder.

And everytime, the UK or other state drops a precision high explosive munition on a building somewhere in world, that is murder to.

Tue, 2011-09-27 11:48 — Andyb (not verified)

@john woods

Nothing Anne Coulter ever says or writes can be considered excellent. She's a bigotted, rightwing, evangelical idiot.

The evidence used to convict the man is highly questionable. The police didn't even follow standard protocol when interviewing the witnesses, protocol designed to avoid influencing those witnesses. And it's the testimony of those witnesses that was key in convicting this man. There was very little material evidence.

Maybe he did shoot the guy, I don't know. Nobody knows. But the conviction was based on highly dubious evidence. Based on this, the execution should not have been carried out.

Wed, 2011-09-21 20:50 — Christine Burns (not verified)

The spam message above, in the discussion space for such a grave topic, seems to epitomise the moral desert we inhabit, where officials are prepared to take a man's life as part of their job.

"What did you do at work today daddy?"

"I killed a man because some other men decided killing is wrong and that it would be solved by me pressing the button for them."

Fri, 2011-09-23 02:23 — Daniele1

Divine:
Of course if somebody hurt a child of mine, I would want to kill them. This is natural, like a primitive reaction. But that is not justice, it is just revenge. At first thre was just revenge, but that was messy and a lot of mistakes were made. That is why most societies came up with a Justice system with people who were not personally connected to the crime to ensure some objectivity, with a judge and some defence counsel for the accused.
The capital punishment isn't justice. It is the good old revenge on behalf of the relatives of the victim who should be the last people to decide on the sentence because they cannot be objective and they are angry ( not hungry like you said,unless you meant to eat the criminal?)
It is also very strange that a murder is punished by another murder. Does the state go and set fire to the house of an arsonist? Does the state have a man beaten up if he is accused of having beaten up someone? Does the state have a man raped if he is found guilty of rape?No of course not.
"An eye for an eye" is a very primitive way of administering justice.Yes just 2000 years old if I am not mistaken. Shouldn't we have moved on from this by now?

Wed, 2012-03-21 08:17 — ChurchillDexter

One of the jurors said that the prosecution 'proved' from 'expert firemen' that there was definitely accelerant used. However, forensic fire investigation improved over the years as scientists got involved, and it was proved that there was no evidence of accelerant used. The juror said the issue of the accelerant was the main reason why the jury convicted Cameroon. http://www.helpwithbaby.com/

Fri, 2011-09-23 03:51 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

Daniele: 'Primitive', 'to move on'. It's difficult to know exactly if what we did in the past was primitive merely because it was in the past and it is different to what we think today.

The feeling of revenge is strong when something is done to you or to one you love. Is this feeling necessarily primitive? Is any form of punishment 'primitive'? You could argue, going by your logic, that nobody deserves to be punished for anything they have done.

At the same time I am in accordance with you with regards to the death penalty but for different reasons.

Fri, 2011-09-23 04:48 — Ivan Miletitch

I don't know if he was guilty or not....but that's the whole point! The appeal was rejected becasue 'he failed to prove his innocence on the many occasions that were offered him to do so' (as per the statement given after his execution)... Usually (but the USA are sometimes an unusual state!) justice dictates that it is up to the prosecution to prove ghuilt, and not to the defendent to prove innocence!

Wed, 2011-09-21 22:34 — Daniele1

The US is a barbaric state.
Only barbaric states still execute their citizens.

Wed, 2011-09-21 22:37 — sean drew (not verified)

"what did you do at work today daddy?"

"i ended the life of a scumbag who shot someone in the face and then killed a copper - thus making the world a safer place, whilst at the same time saving lots of dollars for future tax payers.sweet dreams sweetheart... and remember darling, leftists are niave idealistic fuckwits who care more about the perpetrators of crimes than they do about the victims or potential victims - its a funny old world"

Mon, 2011-09-26 00:28 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

The greater good argument. What evidence is there that life imprisonment is a lesser deterrent than execution? There isn't any because criminals think they will get away with it. At least with life imprisonment, new evidence may emerge than frees an innocent person. A innocent person executed has no such chance. Therefore the greater good exists when there is life imprisonment and not execution.

A guilty person is still imprisoned and can't kill you or your loved ones. An innocent person lives as opposed to dies.

Thu, 2011-09-22 00:28 — Dickie1

@sean drew,

Thanks for making the world a more miserable place to be. :-)

Thu, 2011-09-22 00:35 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

sean: I would agree with you that some people do deserve the death penalty for the things they have done. However, the death penalty has resulted in the execution of innocent people. There are many instances in the US where the evidence has been 'flimsy' to say the least and people have been wrongly convicted and then executed.

One case in the early 90s involved a father who was convicted of setting a lit the house that killed his children. At the time a fireman gave 'evidence' to say that the fire was deliberately lit, and because the father was disliked in the area he was convicted and executed on this basis.

Forensic analysis improved over the years and real experts proved that the fire was accidental ...even when the person was on death row. The governor who was up for reelection didn't annul the conviction despite the new evidence and the person was executed.

Thu, 2011-09-22 00:42 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

Here is a list of cases where DNA evidence has resulted in the overturning of a conviction ... but there are many where it has not and an innocent person has been executed. You might think that that's the way it goes but you wouldn't think that if it was innocent you on death row.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases

Tue, 2011-09-27 14:07 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

But isn't self-defence a form of punishment for a particular type of behaviour?

How about if a armed man broke into a house and had tied up the daughter and had assaulted her. The father returns to the house with a gun and the man tries to escape but the father shoots him in the back. I reckon the father is perfectly justified in punishing the intruder with death. The death penalty in this case is my opinion justified. What do you think Andyb?

Thu, 2011-09-22 01:12 — Attrition47

America, how revolting.

Mon, 2011-09-26 02:40 — Daniele1

Divine: your last comment is identical to my argument against the death penalty expressed above. But for that I have been branded "a clown" to be "pitied"and oh.. my comments are "hilarious".
I say :not fair! Buckskin I want you to insult Divine as well. Otherwise I might think you pick on me!
Hang on, did you say you were married to a lawyer from South Texas. my gawd! that explains a lot.
Are you a member of the tea party by any chance?Is Sarah Palin your hero or is it Bachman? Come on you can tell us! Everything you say fits the bill.
Sorry I forgot you were not talking to me any more. After this bit of information I won't bother any more either. No worries.

Mon, 2011-09-26 03:19 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

Daniele: I don't think my argument is identical to yours. You say the death penalty is 'barbaric'. But I'm saying the death penalty by 'affected' individuals is OK, is not barbaric, if they know for sure who committed the crime. My objection is that the death penalty by the state involves third parties who for a number of reasons make mistakes. As a result an innocent person is sometimes executed.

As to your relationship with Buckskins and the accompanying abuse that occurs between the two of you during your exchanges...well all I can say is that it takes two to tango. Why don't you apologise? And start a fresh.

Thu, 2011-09-22 01:40 — Daniele1

Divine, it is worse than that. Executing innocent people is bad enough (that doesn't seem to bother the Sean Drews of this world), but the killing of a human being, like torture, by the state degrades us all.
George Orwell said it better than me.
It is the mark of a civilised society that it doesn't kill its own citizens, even when they have committed heinous crimes.
I know it is difficult to comprehend for people who see the world in black and white.Executions are an anachronism, a remnant of more barbaric times and the death penalty should be abolished throughout the world.

Sat, 2011-09-24 17:27 — Buckskins (not verified)

Mr D.
So four different experts decide he could have been innocent. (and it is possible the fire was accidental.) Oh well hell let him go. Daniele is more to be pitied that ridiculed by me. I'm quite content to have him/her continue with his/her hilarious comments. It must be awful to carry around all that jealousy and venom in your heart.

Thu, 2011-09-22 05:04 — DJ (not verified)

Georia, maybe you want to make sure you have the right person because if not you are the murder!!!!!!!!!!!

Thu, 2011-09-22 05:18 — Brick Fighter (not verified)

This is just wrong and so typical of the racist state of Georgia! Wow, really, we must take a stand for injustice. There was the 'shadow of a doubt', but Troy Davis was executed by the state of Georgia anyway. Way to go Georgia, you really proved that your confederate ways are still alive and rampant in our society. Guess what though, we will prevail! We must act and fast...

Thu, 2011-09-22 05:20 — JC (not verified)

The basic issue with the Death Penalty is that no citizen of any state is truly greater than the power that state can exert, if the Death Penalty exists and the state chooses to implement it. Under such circumstances, no one can consider themselves free, if they live under the shadow of political or bureaucratic forces that have life or death power over them; and without money or influence, everyone is potentially a miscarriage of justice away from tragedy.

Mon, 2011-09-26 11:27 — Andyb (not verified)

The State Board of Pardons and Paroles would be better named the State Board of Executions and Executioners. I find it shocking how callous these people are. That despite all the evidence pointing to an unsafe conviction, they are hellbent on proceding with the execution. Are they too scared to admit they might be wrong? What does it take to overturn a wrongful conviction in America these days?

There was no hard evidence linking this man to the crime, no weapon, no ballistics, no confession. The police brazenly manipulated the witnesses and violated all well established procedures. But still the execution went ahead. This is really shameful!

Mon, 2011-09-26 11:27 — Daniele1

Divine, yes ok you think the only problem with the death penalty is the possible execution of innocents, I think the whole principle is wrong AS WELL.
AS to my relation with Bucskin, I have nothing to apologise for and I was only joking in my last post.I really couldn't give a toss about what Bucksin thinks of me or say to me.In fact I would be worried if we agreed on anything. To be offended by some one you have to respect that person first, otherwise it is meaningless.

Thu, 2011-09-22 11:20 — Marcus (not verified)

@JC - Great explanation

Mon, 2011-09-26 12:05 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

Yes I know your position Daniele. But I think it is alright to kill someone else in some circumstances. I mean what is the 'death penalty' ... to penalise someone by taking their life.

Do you think it is OK to kill someone in certain circumstances? To penalise them by death as a consequence of what they have done.

Thu, 2011-09-22 11:52 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

Daniele: I'm not sure that the death penalty is 'barbaric' or that such a penalty 'degrades' us all. I mean exactly what is barbaric and what is it to be 'degraded'?

The death penalty for a person who has murdered or raped a child is a good thing. In order to imprison someone for a long period of time it will cost money and that money comes from the labours of others. An execution will save the labour of others. My objection to the state dishing out the death penalty stems from the problem of knowing for sure if the person committed the crime.

For instance, I can't see why I shouldn't revenge the murder or rape of one of my children. You can regard my action as barbaric or degrading but for me I feel it would be the right thing to do if I knew for sure who committed the crime. I think you have to realise that revenge is part of us and is the reason why many people support the death penalty. Perhaps it is 'barbaric' not to seek revenge.

Wed, 2011-09-28 17:52 — Buckskins (not verified)

Mr D.

Yet you have no qualms about an abortionist tearing an unborn child apart in a "Mothers" womb.

Fri, 2011-09-23 13:25 — Captain Sensible (not verified)

Is it possible to lock his lawyers away for a long time? They seem to be causing unnecessary suffering and torture to a dumb animal whilst they get rich from a dead man?

Thu, 2011-09-22 12:59 — thecolumnista

I wrote a recent column expressing similar anti death penalty views this week (www.themortonreport.com/celebrity/notables/-shame-on-you-america/. The only doubt that remains in my head is that fact that I rejoiced when Osama bin Laden was executed. You could argue that he was killed as an act of war, but in essence it amounts to the same thing. He was assassinated for having taken the lives of 3,000 (and many more) souls on 9/11, rather than being killed in the heat of battle. I am glad that he is dead but yet opposed to the death penalty, is it possible to reconcile these two emotions?www.thecolumnista.com

Mon, 2011-09-26 13:40 — Andyb (not verified)

@Buckskins
"The odd innocent being executed is the price paid for the greater good. Would you prefer an escaped murderer God forbid, kill your child, or a loved one? It happens."

With an attitude like that, you would be an excellent candidate for the State Board of Pardons and Paroles. It's nice to know you're happy to execute the odd innocent guy. What fine moral values!

@Daniele
I'm on your side 100%.

Thu, 2011-09-22 14:05 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

I think you can oppose the death penalty by the state because innocent people are executed but support the killing of certain people because you feel that the best thing for the world and you is for the person to die. This feeling is at its strongest when a person has committed a horrendous act against your family or when you are very hungry.

The idea that all killing is wrong doesn't take into account circumstances such as killing someone in self-defence. In some circumstances virtually everyone feels it is justified to kill. In fact we all, even vegans, kill things every day in order to live. It has only been in recent times that we haven't killed members of other tribes for meat, mainly because we haven't needed to.

The problem is when the state tries to quantify those circumstances into a 'model' and mistakes are made fitting people into that 'model' or those 'circumstances'. Unfortunately, today with Troy the state has made another mistake.

Mon, 2011-09-26 13:51 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

Andyb: How do you know all the sides that Daniele is on? Do you think it is OK to punish someone with death under certain circumstances?

Tue, 2011-09-27 18:59 — john woods (not verified)

Er, no, none of the evidence was in any way questionable. Davis's guilt is beyond any reasonable doubt.

David Alan Green prides himself on his lawyerly qualities. But the fact is, that almost literally EVERYTHING he wrote in the article is factually wrong. But, he he writes for the New Statesman, and Davis was black, so who cares?

When are the lefties gonna protest about the execution of James Byrd?

You can be for or against capital punishment for the guilty, and I acknowledge that there are arguments on both sides. There are, however NO arguments for Troy Davis's innocence. Hedunnit.

Mon, 2011-09-26 14:28 — Andyb (not verified)

"Do you think it is OK to punish someone with death under certain circumstances?"

No I don't. Murder is murder.

Thu, 2011-09-22 14:22 — swatantra nandanwar

DAG of all people should have some faith in the Justice System of a Nation. However Human Rights or Natural Law should supercede a Nations Law. But with Rights come Responsibilities, and these should be forfeited if the perpetrator of a crime has taken the life of another. Its Law that creates civil society. And we should have faith in the Law. Otherwise who the hell and what the hell can we trust in. Its Laws that govern society and we make those Laws.
We should also respect the Laws of other Nations, and not assume that ours is the best and only Law.
Sometimes the Law makes a mistake but only rarely. 99.9% of the time it gets it right.

Tue, 2011-09-27 19:12 — john woods (not verified)

AndyB:

1. The word is "bigoted".

2. So, a right wing evangelical (which she aint, incidentally, she's a Catholic) must ipso facto, be wrong. (look up ipso facto)I doubt you would understand it.

Tue, 2011-09-27 19:23 — john woods (not verified)

The whole thing reminds me irrestistably of the Hanratty case.

He MUST have been innocent, cos Pol Fot said he was. If you disagree, you're a fascist, and I'll throw a temper tantrum.