PDA

View Full Version : Controversial execution carried out after 20 years on death row.



Trev
23-09-2011, 09:39 AM
Here. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10753519)
:)

wainuitech
23-09-2011, 10:11 AM
Heard a bit about that on the radio yesterday.

Just reading the article, interesting piece near the end
The high court set a tough standard for Davis to exonerate himself, ruling that his attorneys must "clearly establish'' Davis' innocence a higher bar to meet than prosecutors having to prove guilt. What happened to innocent till proven guilty. Going by the article, there may have in fact been some doubt
Witnesses placed Davis at the crime scene and identified him as the shooter, but several of them have recanted their accounts and some jurors have said they've changed their minds about his guiltReading everything that is available it may read differently.

R2x1
23-09-2011, 10:29 AM
He's been proven guilty several times according to the usual rules. Apparently even the legal system eventually tired of the procession of lawyers enthusiastically squeezing money out of the case.

KarameaDave
23-09-2011, 10:54 AM
And when he is finally proven innocent, they will of course, resurrect him.

prefect
23-09-2011, 11:08 AM
This guy was guilty and deserves execution.

Bobh
23-09-2011, 11:25 AM
And when he is finally proven innocent, they will of course, resurrect him.

Little point in proving him innocent now.

KarameaDave
23-09-2011, 12:58 PM
Can you not recognise sarcasm?

wainuitech
23-09-2011, 01:18 PM
He's been proven guilty several times according to the usual rules. Apparently even the legal system eventually tired of the procession of lawyers enthusiastically squeezing money out of the case. Really!! explain this then
The case drew attention for having no physical evidence linking him to the crime. Seven of the nine witnesses who helped convict Davis have retracted or recanted their testimony.
The case was also racially-charged


The main reason was because he was accused of killing a cop - there are many other crimes that have killed more people and they are sitting in some prison getting food water and shelter.

On the radio yesterday they were actually talking to another person that was on death row, his sentence was stopped at the last hour, it took many years, but in the end they found the real killer, and the accused was realised, now a free man, proven innocent.

if he was guilty or not, the cops will never tell. Its been happening for awhile Others Proven Innocent (http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-and-innocence)

Gobe1
23-09-2011, 01:24 PM
Everyone wants to see capital punishment "an eye for an eye" but when it comes to the crunch everyone thinks its ....... wrong?

pctek
23-09-2011, 01:39 PM
Everyone wants to see capital punishment "an eye for an eye" but when it comes to the crunch everyone thinks its ....... wrong?

I'm all for death for nasty crimes, but only where it's been proven, and I mean properly, not lawyer dodginess. Because innocent people do get executed in the US.

SurferJoe46
23-09-2011, 02:05 PM
US law provides that anyone on the scene, whether they have a weapon or shoot - since they are at a crime that results in the death of a person, then all persons who are there are guilty of the whole crime.

It keeps gangs from saying that they personally didn't pull the trigger, when all were there causing mayhem and murder under the same cover.

The person there who didn't pull the trigger or shed any of their blood providing material for DNA results, etc., is still guilty by association in capital offense crimes: murder.

That's called an 'accessory to a crime' and carries the same sentencing standards.

I personally have no real info about the crime, but going through several levels and repeats of levels of courts and appeals, all his nine lives were prolly used by now.

Metla
23-09-2011, 03:07 PM
I'm all for the death sentence, But don't consider what goes on in America to be any of my business. It bad enough how local news gets twisted and distorted never mind the agendas involved in something on the other side of the world.

I don't care whether they execute people, or on what grounds. I have no more idea about his guilt then any other NZ'er, To most its just something to rally against. I laughed when they blocked emails from NZ.

GameJunkie
23-09-2011, 03:18 PM
is it controversial because he was black?? it seems to be the case more often than not.

Agent_24
23-09-2011, 03:42 PM
It's too hard to prove 100% it was them, like Pctek said, too many dodgy lawyers, and many other factors come into play.

The fact that people have been wrongfully executed for crimes they did not commit is terrible, and this should never happen.

prefect
23-09-2011, 04:49 PM
The guy was already a crook before he killed the off duty cop. In fact just before that he had fired at a passing car.
He just so deserved to die and I even think death by injection is too easy for a cop killer. I would have preferred him to be fried by an electric chair

R2x1
23-09-2011, 04:50 PM
He was "proven" guilty by the same system that pronounced OJ innocent. See? It's obviously fair.

R2x1
23-09-2011, 04:52 PM
The guy was already a crook before he killed the off duty cop. In fact just before that he had fired at a passing car.
He just so deserved to die and I even think death by injection is too easy for a cop killer. I would have preferred him to be fried by an electric chair

The electric chair is the soft option. Severe cases get fried by an electric hair dryer.

The Ultimate Evil sods get a Ford.

Cicero
23-09-2011, 05:55 PM
The electric chair is the soft option. Severe cases get fried by an electric hair dryer.

The Ultimate Evil sods get a Ford.

I knew you were cruel, but that takes the cake!

Agent_24
23-09-2011, 05:57 PM
Does that mean all the Ford drivers are actually convicted serial killers?

prefect
23-09-2011, 06:00 PM
He was "proven" guilty by the same system that pronounced OJ innocent. See? It's obviously fair.

No biggy when Dad punished me with a bit of willow branch and I screamed I was innocent he used to say well this for the times you got away with it without getting caught then.
Same with this gun carrying crook.

Digby
23-09-2011, 06:45 PM
I think that in cases where there is no doubt then they should be excuted after one appeal

This would be a TRUE deterrent.

It would also put an end to those people who say that the death sentence costs more than life imprisonment.

Keeping people on death row for 20 or 30 years does no one any good.

If there is some doubt, then give them life. Which in the USA does mean life.

Agent_24
23-09-2011, 07:33 PM
If the death penalty was a deterrent then why do people still commit crimes worth of it?

Gobe1
23-09-2011, 07:35 PM
If the death penalty was a deterrent then why do people still commit crimes worth of it?

Correct, it is no deterrent otherwise in those countries that have it their serious crimes would be nil

Bobh
23-09-2011, 08:38 PM
Does that mean all the Ford drivers are actually convicted serial killers?

Lucky for me that I disposed of my Ford a few weeks ago, I now have a Toyota. :banana

KarameaDave
23-09-2011, 08:41 PM
My cousin was murdered by a neighbouring rancher in New Mexico twenty odd years ago.

The a---hole put 6 bullets in Johns' back then pistol-whipped Johns' wife.

No provocation.

This rich white man never spent a minute in jail
and got away with it on some technicality or other.

My Uncle and Aunt went over there for the 'trial'

Broke both their hearts, but there you go.

American justice, what a joke.

mikebartnz
23-09-2011, 09:38 PM
This guy was guilty and deserves execution.
It must make you feel really good to not have any doubts. Would be a different story if it was your head.
At the time did you think Arthur Allen Thomas was guilty or innocent.
No physical evidence and witnesses are known to be totally unreliable and several in this case have retracted their statement so it makes for an extremely dodgy conviction.

mikebartnz
23-09-2011, 09:42 PM
This rich white man never spent a minute in jail
and got away with it on some technicality or other.
That is one thing that frightened me in the states. I was in a situation in the USA years ago and knowing the bastard was a little rich pr!ck had me worried.

prefect
24-09-2011, 09:16 AM
It must make you feel really good to not have any doubts. Would be a different story if it was your head.
At the time did you think Arthur Allen Thomas was guilty or innocent.
No physical evidence and witnesses are known to be totally unreliable and several in this case have retracted their statement so it makes for an extremely dodgy conviction.

Hello he had just fired his revolver at a passing car injuring a person before killing the polizei, In Singapore this alone is more than enough for mandatory execution.
He is guilty as night follows day.

mikebartnz
24-09-2011, 12:14 PM
Hello he had just fired his revolver at a passing car injuring a person before killing the polizei, In Singapore this alone is more than enough for mandatory execution.
He is guilty as night follows day.
May be you can point me to where it says he had just fired his revolver at a passing motorist.
Once again "At the time did you think Arthur Allen Thomas was guilty or innocent."

PaulD
24-09-2011, 01:05 PM
Depends on your definition of "just". There are 2 people likely to have shot the Policeman, Troy Davis or Sylvester "Redd" Coles. Only one of that pair was also on the scene of another shooting where a shot was fired at Darrell Collins. Sylvester "Redd" Coles became a prosecution witness, he probably should have been tried as an accomplice.

mikebartnz
24-09-2011, 01:32 PM
Depends on your definition of "just". There are 2 people likely to have shot the Policeman, Troy Davis or Sylvester "Redd" Coles. Only one of that pair was also on the scene of another shooting where a shot was fired at Darrell Collins. Sylvester "Redd" Coles became a prosecution witness, he probably should have been tried as an accomplice.
I always find it very dodgy when "Sylvester "Redd" Coles became a prosecution witness," or they get some sort of clemency for being a witness.

mikebartnz
24-09-2011, 01:40 PM
Depends on your definition of "just".
Just = within a brief preceding time.

prefect
24-09-2011, 02:30 PM
May be you can point me to where it says he had just fired his revolver at a passing motorist.
Once again "At the time did you think Arthur Allen Thomas was guilty or innocent."

On the evening of August 18, 1989, Davis briefly attended a pool party hosted by a friend in the Cloverdale neighborhood of Savannah, Georgia. As he left with his friend Darrell Collins, the occupants of a passing car yelled obscenities at them. A bullet was fired into the car and Michael Cooper, a passenger in the other car, was shot in the face by Davis. In lots of countries shooting someone in the face is punishable by death.
If there was the death penalty in NZ you would hope the police wouldnt stitch him up so there is no analogy with Arthur Thomas.
And why do you use his middle name? do you use other peoples middle name as well?

Zippity
24-09-2011, 02:46 PM
Controversial why??

Because the "Pinkos" and "Greenies" claim it to be so??

The bastard deserved to die - the day he shot the passenger in the other car in the face - period!

mikebartnz
24-09-2011, 03:03 PM
On the evening of August 18, 1989, Davis briefly attended a pool party hosted by a friend in the Cloverdale neighborhood of Savannah, Georgia. As he left with his friend Darrell Collins, the occupants of a passing car yelled obscenities at them. A bullet was fired into the car and Michael Cooper, a passenger in the other car, was shot in the face by Davis. In lots of countries shooting someone in the face is punishable by death.
So it turns out the just was not even on the same day. Considering 7 of the 9 witnesses had retracted part or all of their statement I still think he shouldn't have had the death penalty. Once again witnesses have been proved time and again to be very unreliable.

If there was the death penalty in NZ you would hope the police wouldnt stitch him up so there is no analogy with Arthur Thomas.
Well as they stitched him up any way, I certainly wouldn't think a death penalty or not would have made any difference as what they did was just totally wrong.
What I was getting at is at the time of his incarceration with your attitude you would have been quite happy to have him strung up as it wasn't until years later that we knew he had been stitched up

And why do you use his middle name? do you use other peoples middle name as well?
I used his middle name because it has become the norm to do so. Stop being a prat.

PaulD
24-09-2011, 03:37 PM
So it turns out the just was not even on the same day. Speed up! One event happened after Davis left a party on the evening of the 18th and the other 1.15am on the morning of the 19th ie the same night.

prefect
24-09-2011, 05:36 PM
So it turns out the just was not even on the same day. Considering 7 of the 9 witnesses had retracted part or all of their statement I still think he shouldn't have had the death penalty. Once again witnesses have been proved time and again to be very unreliable.

Well as they stitched him up any way, I certainly wouldn't think a death penalty or not would have made any difference as what they did was just totally wrong.
What I was getting at is at the time of his incarceration with your attitude you would have been quite happy to have him strung up as it wasn't until years later that we knew he had been stitched up

I used his middle name because it has become the norm to do so. Stop being a prat.

Technically you are right it was the next day but it was the same night only 2 hours diff.
IMO this guy deserved his execution, him and guns just didnt gell. Kill a polizei in the Southern states of the USA and you forfeit your life, it isnt rocket science.

mikebartnz
24-09-2011, 09:30 PM
Technically you are right it was the next day but it was the same night only 2 hours diff.
IMO this guy deserved his execution, him and guns just didnt gell. Kill a polizei in the Southern states of the USA and you forfeit your life, it isnt rocket science.
From what I have read there is even doubt as to if he was the one that fired the gun on the first event.

SurferJoe46
25-09-2011, 02:22 AM
From what I have read there is even doubt as to if he was the one that fired the gun on the first event.

Didn't matter and is ot an arguable point. 'On the scene' at a murder is guilt if he traveled with or was part of the group that committed the murder.

It may smack of guilt-by-association, but they were all in it together and that's a capitol offense when it caused the death of another person - in this case a cop.

Some states have other laws that allow for 'lying-in-wait' for the purposes of robbery or other crime. That automatically carries the burden of evidence of intent to commit great bodily harm.

Travel in a pack aand someone dies and all can be guilty of murder, especially if no-one admits gult.

mikebartnz
25-09-2011, 04:13 AM
- in this case a cop.
In this case he wasn't a cop as he was moonlighting as a security guard so he was shot as a security guard and not a cop. Very little difference but in NZ what he was doing would be illegal.

PaulD
25-09-2011, 12:04 PM
It may smack of guilt-by-association, but they were all in it together and that's a capitol offense when it caused the death of another person - in this case a cop.



That is one of the dodgy aspects of this case, some of the witnesses now claim that they were pressured by the police to testify that Davis did it or they would also be arrested. Less real evidence and more a bunch of other low lifers saving their own skins.