Date Set for Troy Davis Oral Arguments-gctid31902

[nattyreb]

via:  Freedom Archives
==================

WABE: Date Set for Davis Oral Arguments (2008-11-20)

Date Set for Davis Oral Arguments

Odette Yousef
ATLANTA, GA (2008-11-20) A hearing date has been set for convicted killer Troy Davis before the federal 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court, which stopped Davis's scheduled execution last month, will hear oral arguments about a new round of appeals on December 9th.

Jason Ewart, one of Davis's lawyers, says he'll have to show the circuit judges that his team has met two requirements:

EWART: As long as one, you can prove that the defendant is actually innocent by clear and convincing evidence, and number two, the requirement is that the evidence underlying his innocence could not have been discovered earlier.

Davis was convicted in 1991 of killing an off-duty Savannah police officer, but seven of the nine witnesses who implicated him have since recanted.

His lawyers want the circuit court to give them permission to file an appeal with the U.S. District Court of Southern Georgia for a fresh trial, where they can present the new evidence. This could kickstart a whole new round of appeals in the federal courts.

Chatham County District Attorney Spencer Lawton, who prosecuted Davis, declined to comment on the pending hearing.

© Copyright 2008, WABE
**************************************************

FORMER JUDGE, FBI CHIEF SPEAKS OUT FOR TROY DAVIS

"Our system owes Troy Davis another day in court"

By WILLIAM S. SESSIONS

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

It is wrong to execute an innocent man. The U.S. Court of Appeals for
the 11th Circuit will now consider whether it is constitutional. Troy
Anthony Davis, convicted of murder, is asking the courts to hear
evidence that key government witnesses have repudiated their testimony
against him. But so far the courts have decided that, while he may be
innocent, procedural rules prevent them from taking a second look.

For 17 years, Troy Davis has been on Georgia's death row for murdering
a police officer. As the director of the FBI under Presidents Reagan,
Bush and Clinton, and as a former federal judge, I believe that there
is no more serious offense than the murder of a police officer.
However, crucial unanswered questions surround claims of Davis'
responsibility for this terrible crime, and I believe that the
execution should not go forward until the courts address them and
determine whether he is in fact guilty.

Police never found a murder weapon. Seven of the nine nonpolice
witnesses recanted or changed their original testimony. Some of these
witnesses say police pressed them to implicate Davis. Some also point
to another man, one of the two witnesses who continue to implicate
Davis, as the real murderer.

Because these revelations came after Davis was convicted, court rules
have prevented a full hearing on Davis' claim of innocence. These
rules, put in place to prevent endless appeals by the guilty, may also
cut off a lifeline to the innocent.

These rules bar appeals courts from hearing even the most important of
claims if the defendant did not properly raise them at trial. This is
true even if the failure to raise them was not caused by the
defendant. This was the situation in Davis' case; his lawyers were
overworked and underpaid public defenders who admit they were unable
to investigate the facts and provide a comprehensive defense.

These procedural rules mean that no court has ever held a hearing on
the claims of innocence raised by Davis's current legal team. To send
a man to his death because procedural obstacles prevent the courts
from considering the merits of his claim of innocence would, in my
view, be a travesty.

I am a member of the Constitution Project's bipartisan Death Penalty
Committee, which includes both supporters, such as myself, and
opponents of the death penalty. We have issued a series of
recommendations to address the profound risk that the wrong people
will be convicted or even executed under a capital punishment system
that is deeply flawed. One of those recommendations is that courts
must hear the merits of claims such as those raised by Davis, and that
procedural obstacles that would otherwise bar such review should be
abolished.

There are those who say that it is enough that courts have looked at
the recanting witnesses' affidavits. It is not. Since there was no
physical evidence, this case was built almost entirely on witness
testimony. Only a full hearing, with all witnesses subject to rigorous
cross-examination and a full exploration of the circumstances of their
testimony, will provide a means to determine the reliability of this
conviction. This never happened at trial. It must happen now.

On Oct. 24, the 11th Circuit judges wisely stayed Davis's impending
execution to give him the opportunity to request a full hearing. Yet
the law says that, even if Davis can provide compelling evidence that
he is innocent, if the court determines that he could have introduced
the evidence at an earlier date, that evidence of innocence is not
enough to stay the executioner's hand. Procedural obstacles would
block the truth, and finality would trump fairness.

Davis is not asking the court to set him free. He is asking for the
court's permission to give his innocence claims the full hearing they
deserve. Our justice system should punish the guilty, free the
innocent and have the wisdom to know the difference. I hope the 11th
Circuit will give Davis his day in court.

• Williams Sessions, a former district court judge, served as FBI
director from 1987 to 1993.

Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

Freedom Archives - home Questions and comments may be sent to claude@freedomarchives.org