Just look at what it takes for someone to present evidence of his innocence after being sentenced to death for a murder. The state sentenced Troy Davis to death after being accused of shooting an off duty, white policeman, moonlighting as a security guard at a Burger King restaurant in 1989. Troy was 19 years old at the time. They did it without any physical evidence linking him to the crime. The state convicted Troy based on the testimony of nine witnesses, seven of whom now say their court testimony was wrong.

What about the other 2 witnesses? Well, one of them who wants to testify against Troy is one of the state's prime suspects for this murder. Moreover, it is common knowledge that eye witness testimony is about the weakest evidence admitted in any court. People think they see things, especially in moments of urgency or excitement, that are often not real. Others are simply not able to reconstruct their memory from the initial encounter.

In The Problem With Eyewitness Testimony, a Stanford University Law School study states:

"Once witnesses state facts in a particular way or identify a particular person as the perpetrator, they are unwilling or even unable—due to the reconstruction of their memory—to reconsider their initial understanding. When a witness identifies a person in a line-up, he is likely to identify that same person in later line-ups, even when the person identified is not the perpetrator. Although juries and decision-makers place great reliance on eyewitness identification, they are often unaware of the danger of false memories."

Moreover, how many times have people admitted, "They all look the same", when looking at a member of a different race? In Troy Davis' case, seven of the nine witnesses have now recanted their testimony.

So what does the state prosecutor have? Nothing. They have:

• No physical evidence linking Troy with the crime. Physical evidence (e.g. a murder weapon) is considered by most to be the strongest evidence that can be presented in a case of capital crime.
  
  
• 2 witnesses who are apparently, still willing to testify, one of them a suspect in the killing. Will Troy's death save this witness' life?
  
  
• 7 witnesses who helped convict Troy recanting their testimony, saying that they were pressured by police to incriminate Davis.
  
  
• A court proceeding fraught with errors, based on false testimony and bad conviction 20 years ago.
  
  
• No confession by Troy Davis. Troy has always maintained his innocence.
  
  
• No DNA or fingerprints linking Troy to the crime.

Still, incredibly, the Supreme court only says his execution will be only be delayed until he proves his own innocence. Wait a minute. Back up here. So now we have to prove our own innocence when charged with a crime? Guilty until proven innocent is the new standard for the State to kill a man in U.S. death chambers. How does one prove a negative? What level of proof does Troy have to present to the court? Steven Bright, Yale University Law School professor stated,

"The Supreme Court here says the evidence has to be so good, it not just proves but proves clearly that he's innocent. So he has a high burden to meet and anyone would have difficulty meeting that burden."

In this case, it is obvious to this writer that the burden for proving one's innocence is greater than the state's burden of proof for one's guilt. Denying a delay of execution by the U.S. Supreme Court in Troy's case would have required such an obvious miscarriage of justice that they simply could not turn their backs this time. According to the CNN story below it took the following conditions for Troy Davis to even get a delay in his execution and an opportunity to have an evidentiary hearing for the possibility of a new trial:

• No physical evidence that he committed the crime.
  
  
• Seven of nine witnesses who testified against Troy - now recanting their story. [Note: Spencer Lawton who was district attorney when Troy was convicted discounted the witnesses who recanted their testimony, calling them "suspect" without any support for his "suspicions".]
  
  
• A petition with 60,000 signatures supporting Troy Davis. [Note: Associated Press relays an NAACP report that 11,000 of the 60,000 signatures came from Georgia's Savannah and Chatham counties. AP then felt it necessary to race-bait and politicize Troy's life and death struggle, describing these counties: "... where black voters were key to Chisolm’s election as the county’s first African-American district attorney last fall. Davis is also black." Is the fact that they are African American the reason former D.A., Spencer Lawton thinks they are "suspicious"? Is Black testimony of lesser value than white?
  
• The support of luminaries like Susan Sarandon and Harry Belafonte and the well known musical group, the Indigo Girls.
  
  
• The support of world leaders like President Jimmy Carter, Archbishop Desmond Tutu; U.S. lawmakers Bob Barr, Carol Moseley Braun and John Lewis.
  
  
• 3 people who did not testify at his trial, saying that another man confessed to the killing. (not mentioned in the article below)

Justice Clarence Thomas voted to deny Troy Davis the right to prove his innocence.	Justice Antonin Scalia called Troy Davis' fight for his life a "fool's errand".

Meanwhile, as Troy tries to prove his innocence, two Supreme Court judges, the notorious Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas are very upset about this delay. They are calling Troy's attempt to prove his innocence a "fool's errand". Scalia smugly, confidently wrote, "Petitioner's claim is a sure loser," despite the state's flawed conviction 20 years ago. It's obvious that Thomas and Scalia are both hell-bent to kill - ready to commit the same crime for which they are crying out for another man's blood.

If it takes this much to even get a delay of execution in the United States, what kind of "proof of innocence" is required to escape the state's lethal injection altogether? How many innocent people are being killed by the U.S. government with these kinds of convictions? How many of them have the international support that Troy Davis has?

Welcome to the U.S. Department of Justice at the highest level.

Support the movement for the Abolition of the Death Penalty in the United States.

- Les Blough, Editor

READ BIO AND MORE ARTICLES BY LES BLOUGH

© Copyright 2009 by AxisofLogic.com

This material is available for republication as long as reprints include verbatim copy of the article in its entirety, respecting its integrity. Reprints must cite the author and Axis of Logic as the original source including a "live link" to the article. Thank you!

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has granted a condemned Georgia inmate's request that his execution be delayed as he attempts to prove his innocence.

The inmate, Troy Davis, has gained international support for his long-standing claim that he did not murder a Savannah police officer nearly two decades ago.

Justice John Paul Stevens on Monday ordered a federal judge to "receive testimony and make findings of fact as to whether evidence that could not have been obtained at trial clearly establishes petitioner's innocence."

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer supported the decision. Sonia Sotomayor, who was sworn in August 8 as the newest member of the high court, did not take part in the petition.

Davis' case has had a dramatic series of ups and downs in the past year. He was granted a stay of execution by the Supreme Court two hours before he was to be put to death last fall.

A month later, the justices reversed course and allowed the execution to proceed, but a federal appeals court then issued another stay.

The high court's latest ruling means Davis will continue to sit on death row.

Stevens said the risk of putting a potentially innocent man to death "provides adequate justification" for another evidentiary hearing.

His supporters in June delivered petitions bearing about 60,000 signatures to Chatham County, Georgia, District Attorney Larry Chisolm, calling for a new trial. Chisolm is the county's first African-American district attorney. Davis is also African-American.

Davis has always maintained his innocence in the 1989 killing of Officer Mark MacPhail. Witnesses said Davis, then 19, and two others were harassing a homeless man in a Burger King restaurant parking lot when the off-duty officer arrived to help the man. Witnesses testified at trial that Davis then shot MacPhail twice and fled.

But since his 1991 conviction, seven of the nine witnesses against him have recanted their testimony. No physical evidence was presented linking Davis to the killing of the policeman.

The Georgia Pardons and Parole Board last year held closed-door hearings and reinterviewed the witnesses and Davis himself. The panel decided against clemency.

MacPhail's mother, Annaliese, told CNN at the time, "This is what we were hoping for, and I hope pretty soon that we will have some peace and start our life, especially my grandchildren -- my grandson and granddaughter. It has overshadowed their lives."

After the justices in October refused to grant a stay of execution, Davis' sister, Martina Correia, told CNN she was "disgusted" by the decision.

"It doesn't make any sense," she said. "We are praying for a miracle or some kind of intervention. We will regroup and fight. We will never stop fighting. We just can't be discouraged. The fight is not over till it's over."

Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas objected to the court's decision Monday, calling it a "fool's errand."

"Petitioner's claim is a sure loser," wrote Scalia. "Transferring his petition to the [federal] District Court is a confusing exercise that can serve no purpose except to delay the state's execution of its lawful criminal judgment."

Ten days after the high court refused last October to intervene, a federal appeals court in Georgia granted a temporary stay of execution. Since then, further appeals by Davis' legal team have dragged on for nearly a year.

Prominent figures ranging from the pope to the musical group Indigo Girls have asked Georgia to grant Davis a new trial. Other supporters include celebrities Susan Sarandon and Harry Belafonte; world leaders such as former President Jimmy Carter and former Archbishop Desmond Tutu; and former and current U.S. lawmakers Bob Barr, Carol Moseley Braun and John Lewis.

CNN