CategoriesJoin Us At:
|
A Plea to the "Court of Last Resort"Today former FBI Director William Sessions wrote in the ACSBlog about the case of Troy Davis, and calls on the U.S. Supreme Court to hear Troy's case. Troy was two hours from being executed when the high Court granted a stay of execution until it decided whether to hear his case. If the court declines to hear the case, the stay will be automatically lifted and the Georgia court can issue another death warrant for Davis' execution. Sessions is a member of the Constitution Project's bipartisan Death Penalty Committee, and is a supporter of the death penalty. But he finds too many unresolved questions—including the quality of Troy's legal representation, recanted witness statements and a complete lack of physical evidence linking Troy to the murder he's convicted of—to advocate for Troy's execution. In addition, Sessions objects to the Georgia courts' procedural rules that bar the admission of testimony that could prove Troy's innocence: The courts considering Mr. Davis’s case properly administered procedural rules that prevent those courts from considering claims that were not raised at the right time or in the right manner. However, these rules can be too restrictive and can prevent the courts from dispensing justice. Presently, the rules can stop the courts from hearing claims of innocence, such as in Mr. Davis’s case. They can prevent the courts from hearing these claims even if the reason they were not properly raised was because of an overburdened lawyer with insufficient resources, such as in Mr. Davis’s case.The ACLU's Capital Punishment Project has been advocating for Troy Davis to receive a new trial since the Georgia Supreme Court gave the go-ahead for his execution in early September. We expect to hear something from the Supreme Court next week, when its 2008 term begins.
Tags: Troy Davis |
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites.
We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published.
Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section.