quote:In the more than two decades that he has been in jail for the murder of white police officer Mark Allen MacPhail, Davis, who is African-American, has maintained his innocence. And seven out of nine witnesses who gave evidence at his trial in 1991 have recanted or changed their testimony.
No murder weapon was ever found, no DNA evidence or fingerprints tie Davis to the crime, and other witnesses have since said the murder was committed by another man -- a witness who testified against him.
The case has became internationally famous as the face of what critics call a corrupted justice system in the US deep South, with a black man wrongly and hastily convicted of killing a white officer.
I've been meaning to be more politically active for a long while. This week a friend invited me to a Rally supporting Troy Davis. I went, expecting to feel a little silly and out of place, chanting slogans that fell upon deaf ears.
There were plenty of deaf ears, but the good thing about NYC is that for every 20 sets of apathetic bystanders there was someone who approached us, genuinely interested in learning what was going on and contributing at least some small effort to help. And there a LOT of people in NYC, so over two hours I ended up speaking to a sizeable number of people. My only dissatisfaction with the rally was some mixing of political messages (some Marxists were hanging around passing out their own pamphlets), and Amnesty USA didn't print enough flyers, so when we ran out I ended up passing out flyers from some workers' union that put a class warfare spin on the issue. (I'm not necessarily opposed to that idea, but any political issue is going to raise people's memetic defenses, and I think bundling issues together makes people more resistant).
The Troy Davis thing is incredible. Sure, all but two witnesses recanted their police-coerced testimony. Sure, one of the two witnesses who didn't recant their testimony is probably the murderer. Sure, the original 'trial' was a goddamned farce. Sure, he doesn't even remotely meet the standard of evidence that the legal system should have as a bare, garbage-minimum prerequisite for having death or life imprisonment on the table. Sure, even William S. Sessions himself says it's completely, gobsmackingly ridiculous that he hasn't been granted a much-deserved evidentiary hearing or perhaps a real trial.
But hey whatever, he's black and this is the south, gas 'em
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
He's black. We all know that black folk are more likely to commit crimes and if you don't kill them, they'll just figure out a way to do something worse (see Texas's upcoming execution- during the sentencing phase, they had an expert witness explain all that).
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: The Troy Davis thing is incredible. Sure, all but two witnesses recanted their police-coerced testimony. Sure, one of the two witnesses who didn't recant their testimony is probably the murderer. Sure, the original 'trial' was a goddamned farce. Sure, he doesn't even remotely meet the standard of evidence that the legal system should have as a bare, garbage-minimum prerequisite for having death or life imprisonment on the table. Sure, even William S. Sessions himself says it's completely, gobsmackingly ridiculous that he hasn't been granted a much-deserved evidentiary hearing or perhaps a real trial.
But hey whatever, he's black and this is the south, gas 'em
Now here's a question I don't know the answer to: can and would President Obama ever pardon this guy? I mean- even just announcing that he has a legal team exploring the case might push the state authorities into taking pre-emptive face saving steps... like giving the guy an actual trial.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Obama can't pardon him. The presidential pardon power extends only to federal crimes.
As this is a state crime, it would be up to Perry to pardon him.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Tell you what, though, I could extend an offer to Perry: pardon this guy or at least do what you can to give him a real trial, and I'll stop thinking that you are a wholly loathesome politician.
I don't think I'm at much risk of having to do change that view, though.
Because it's Perry.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Rick Perry has to pardon him? Isn't he going to be executed by the state of Georgia?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
whoops, chain hallucination. I guess we're way too eager to associate illegitimate executions with texas.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
Well, I introduced to the discussion the Texas case where they used the rational that the defendant was black as reason to execute him so I probably started all that. Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Given Texas' track record in 2011 alone with the sheer number of executions, and the number of problematic, questionable executions, it's no surprise we all managed to derail ourselves.
My bad then, it's up to the governor of Georgia to pardon him.
I was reading a case from just a couple days ago in Texas where a man wanted his death sentence commuted to a lower charge. The Supreme Court issued the stay at the last minute (he'd already had his last meal.) Where was Perry? Campaigning. The political ad for Obama writes itself.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
Lyrhawn- that is the case I was referencing. The prosecutor called as a witness some "expert" who basically said black men cannot reform. The other cases where this expert was called where retried as it was clear racism, but not this case. I haven't seen why this case was not retried when the rest were. But it is now waiting for the supreme court to decide. I imagine Perry would say the guy was a murderer, who cares if his sentencing was racially motivated. Just like he dismissed the case of the innocent man who was executed by saying the guy was a wifebeater- no loss there.
Posted by rainboy (Member # 12645) on :
(Post Removed by Janitor Blade. Vicious Spam)
[ September 19, 2011, 09:49 AM: Message edited by: JanitorBlade ]
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:If u are the people that like to make friends too,just contact me.
yeah, we like to make friends. isn't that right, vinnie? we're friendly people here, yeah
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
So my second foray into political activism was the Occupy Wall Street protest, which I accidentally wandered into. Which was confusing, had no central goal that I could see, and had that sort of amusing "anarchists who all wear the same clothing" thing going on and bunches of college kids vaguely upset and wanting to show off their political tribalism. (Basically, exactly the kind of thing that's caused me to be wary of getting involved with protests for the past few years).
The only coherent goal anyone had was "end capitalism," which does not seem even hypothetically possible or desirable to me.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
If a guy fawkes mask and some internet memes can't end capitalism, what can?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
What was really funny was a lot of the guy fawkes masks were being worn... on the back of the head? Sort of like a backwards baseball cap? It actually DID look kinda neat, but seemed to defeat the point.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
According to someone there, it was intended to last through the week, but I give them maybe halfway through Monday before they get bored and go home.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:The state Board of Pardons and Paroles on Tuesday denied clemency for Troy Anthony Davis after hearing pleas for mercy from Davis' family and calls for his execution by surviving relatives of a murdered Savannah police officer. ... Davis' case has already taken more unexpected turns than just about any death-penalty case in Georgia history and his innocence claims have attracted international attention. Its resolution was postponed once again when the parole board late Monday announced it would not be making an immediate decision as to whether Davis should live or die.
Davis, 42, is scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection on Wednesday at 7 p.m. at the state prison in Jackson. He was sentenced to death for the 1989 murder of off-duty Savannah Police Officer Mark Allen MacPhail.
Can I just say guilty or innocent, nobody should be required to believe they are going to die, and be told just hours before their time that they have been given an extension, multiple times.
I understand that sometimes it takes that long to get a stay of execution granted, and that's why we set dates in the future so there is time to do these things, but there's just something serious screwed up with thinking you're going to die, and then being told, "nope not this week".
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I wonder how united the surviving family members are on this, or if there's a substantial number of them speaking out? I mean when they're not in front of cameras next to a grieving widow/mother. I have a very difficult time understanding why they would still be certain, "No questions asked," that he is guilty.
Posted by vegimo (Member # 12618) on :
A somewhat inclusive story gives some information on the victim's family. They also provide some depth on what happened the night of the shooting, as well as what evidence was used to link Davis to the murder. It certainly is not conclusive, and there definitely should not be doubt in a death penalty case, so I do think that there should be re-consideration of that penalty. On that long-ago night though, he was a bad, bad man, not an innocent bystander. Whether that determination entered into the jurors' decision, or the subsequent decisions of various boards and officials, is probably the touchiest point of this debate. How much consideration was given, or should have been given, to his behavior over the course of events that led to the shooting?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:On that long-ago night though, he was a bad, bad man, not an innocent bystander.
Well, it really really doesn't matter if he was positively the scum of the Earth that night, if there was reasonable doubt as to whether he committed what he was charged with. That's just very straightforward.
Of course, get some people in a jury and they forget what their duty as Americans actually is and start playing morality cop or 'we just know' prognosticators.
quote:How much consideration was given, or should have been given, to his behavior over the course of events that led to the shooting?
This is another simple question: none whatsoever. Absolutely none. Can it be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he killed the cop he was convincted of killing? That's a yes/no question. It's designed that way. If you can't answer 'yes' to that question, not only can you not kill the guy, you can't incarcerate him either.
Anyway, the heat that's in this post isn't for you, vegimo, it's aimed at the idea that we can for some reason be anything less than certain in a death penalty case, if we're to have the death penalty at all. It's for the idea that it should somehow be hard to redress things like this when such huge problems arise after the trial, and it's for the idea that the suspect's morality, their character, enters into at all questions of guilt or innocence in a criminal trial. That's a thing for sentencing, not for deciding whether or not he's guilty.
Posted by vegimo (Member # 12618) on :
Agreed, and stated.
The relevant point that does bring his previous behavior into play is that he (allegedly) shot another man in the face earlier in the night with (likely) the same gun that was used to kill the officer. The ability of the prosecution to change the alleged and likely events to certainties in the mind of the jurors is the question.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Well, it really really doesn't matter if he was positively the scum of the Earth that night, if there was reasonable doubt as to whether he committed what he was charged with. That's just very straightforward.
The case is a chiaroscuro of shadows of doubt, but I guess that doesn't matter. I take it that said shadows tend to contrast more legibly against pale skin.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
I don't know all of the details of this case, and I hope they don't kill an innocent man, but I have my doubts about his innocence.
The bullet casings matched the same bullet casings he used earlier that day in a non-lethal shooting, which he was convicted of. A man in a car was shot in the face by Davis because he yelled an obcenity at him.
Some of the winesses changed their story, but it took almost 15 years to do so. If they had doubts, why did it take them that long? Were the witnesses coerced by the police or were they coerced by others that were opposed to the case?
As for being convicted just for being black, I'm sorry, don't buy it. Seven of the jurors on his case were black, so I find it highly improbable that race was a deciding factor.
Unfortunately I think the thing that is holding Troy Davis back the most right now is the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act that was passed in 1996.
I wasn't able to find anything about it, but was Troy Davis charged with First Degree or Second Degree murder? If it were considered second degree murder, Cole (the other guy that supposedly shot the cop) is past the statute of limitations and could come out today and say he did it, and the state couldn't do anything about it.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: I don't know all of the details of this case, and I hope they don't kill an innocent man, but I have my doubts about his innocence.
"I have my doubts" should be more than sufficient reason to refrain from killing a person.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Especially an American citizen
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Though that is, sadly, realistic, I am glad to say that "especially an American citizen" did not occur to me.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: I don't know all of the details of this case, and I hope they don't kill an innocent man, but I have my doubts about his innocence.
"I have my doubts" should be more than sufficient reason to refrain from killing a person.
Do I think he did it? Yes. He shot another person earlier and the bullet casings matched. Does what I think really matter? Not one bit. Is the evidence enough to put the guy to death? I don't think so.
So I have my doubts, but the jurors didn't. This is the judicial system we have, and a jury of his peers found him guilty of the crime. I don't like it, but it is the reality. I hope he has a stay of execution, but if it does go through I hope at the very least it will prompt our country to take a closer look at our judicial system and make some much needed changes.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Actually, at least three of the jurors do have doubts and have formally asked for clemency.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Seven of the jurors on his case were black, so I find it highly improbable that race was a deciding factor.
This is a bit of a tangent, but even blacks, on average, tend to have anti-black biases. It's not conscious, but it's fairly easy to test.
The Implicit Association Test is a good measure of this. Try it yourself! The results can be discomfiting to those of us who like to think we're beyond all that.
Then there's experiments like the one in which black students who were merely asked to identify their race on a test form scored significantly lower than black students who took the same test without the race prompt.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:So I have my doubts, but the jurors didn't.
For the sake of argument, let's say none of the jurors had expressed doubts as to his guilt. How many witnesses recanted? How many other people now have reason to be believed they might have killed him? 'Smoke and mirrors' indeed. I'm far from an expert or even a very well informed layman, but it seems to me that the real reason is 'we just don't overturn these things or grant stays if we can possibly help it'.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
I've run into that test, there was even a university student who took the race test on a daily basis and recorded his scores. He found that he scored better on aligning black people with positive terms over a period of time when he was watching a lot of Olympics events that were on at the time. The test and that students findings were covered in Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink, I would elaborate further but my copy is out on loan. I do remember Gladwell finding it odd that the test said he was negative towards black people, seeing as he himself is half black.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:The test and that students findings were covered in Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink.
That's where I was introduced to it as well. Fascinating book, BTW.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
I was unable to accurately identify race from the pictures and therefore my bias can not be determined. Like Colbert, I don't see race.
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
quote:Your data suggest little to no automatic preference between Dark Skin and Light Skin.
I think this gives me clearance for racist humour.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Troy Davis has about 30 minutes left.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Troy Davis has about 30 minutes left.
It's not right that he is being put to death, I just can't see the 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Troy Davis has about 30 minutes left.
It's not right that he is being put to death, I just can't see the 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.
I do agree with you. I used to be for the death penalty, but over time I've changed my opinion. I just don't see the point. I think he should stay in jail until they can definitively decide whether he did it or not. That being said, that is what trials are for.
I think this whole ordeal says more about our judicial system than it does about Troy Davis.
I also can't fathom what the family of the slain police officer is going through right now. I hope to God that people protesting the execution are not yelling hateful things at them.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
US Supreme Court is currently considering a stay of execution right now.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
This blog seems to be updated just as things happen, it might be a good place to look at if you aren't near a television.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
No dice Troy, died about 16 minutes ago.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I must admit, much of my sympathy for the family (those that are personally involved in this process, via the press) has evaporated. I am of course sad that a policeman is dead, and sad that a wife, mother, family etc. are without him now. But they have helped push through, in some small way, the execution of a man we don't know to be guilty. I know the family has claimed it knows he was guilty, but people claim to know things they don't all the time.
I could have sympathy for them acting in support of their cause before it was successful, I think, founded as it must've been on so much anger and grief. Of course this is all a sideshow to the thing that was most responsible for what seems to be a gross miscarriage of justice, our criminal justice system. Geraine's remark about the family is what prompts this post. I don't want anyone shouting hateful things at them either, but speaking for myself it would be difficult to condemn too harshly, in moral terms, their continued call for his death.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I think it's very hard to draw any real conclusion for guilt having almost nobody advocating for the case the prosecution made each time.
SCOTUS certainly stopped this at one time, and now this time without exception said, "No".
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Heh, just gabbed about this for a few minutes with my old man. Deeply frustrating. When I pointed out that we could always just kill Davis later if/when these doubts were laid to rest, he said (a not uncommon response), "Who'd want to rot in prison being raped, poor health, etc.?" I replied that first Davis certainly didn't want to die and then it was, "Well of course *he* didn't want die." Then I pointed out that awful prison conditions aren't a *given*, they're just how we do things here. He scoffed very rudely and said "Where isn't it like that?" and demanded statistics on incarceration rates throughout the 'First World'.
When I tried to say that a death penalty case ought to be *perfect*, with no witnesses recanting, he constructed elaborate hypotheticals where the other evidence was enough even in spite of so witnesses recanting. When he mentioned that lots of really smart people had reviewed this case many times, I pointed out that the same could be said of every instance when someone turned out to be innocent. When I asked what whether his supposed victim wanted to die or be shot had to do with anything, he sneered.
Deeply frustrating, that default faith in the system and scorn for hearing it challenged.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
From what I've read, death row inmates don't usually suffer the sort of prison violence that a lot of other average prisoners in max security prisons do.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Oh, sure. That was in reference to the idea of life in prison vs constant death row.
Heh, when I pointed him to reports by our own HHS, about for example prison population growth vs growth in spending...well *then* the point became, "Oh, so rape doesn't happen in other prisons?"
Posted by Godric 2.0 (Member # 11443) on :
I tweeted this earlier (multiple tweets) as part of a conversation about Troy Davis:
I hate to invoke Godwin's Law... But take Hitler. Someone I could make an argument for death. He chose death over punishment. Meaning, If the bad guy, or in that case, evil guy (Hitler) chooses death over punishment... Shouldn't we be better than that?
And that doesn't even take into consideration my moral and religious views...
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Wait, wait, wait. Because Hitler chose suicide over going through a trial (which would likely have found him guilty of death-penalty offenses), that means executions are always wrong?
That's not Godwin. That's just plain illogical.
Posted by Godric 2.0 (Member # 11443) on :
I didn't say they were always wrong. Note: "...Hitler. Someone I could make an argument for death."
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Heh, just gabbed about this for a few minutes with my old man. Deeply frustrating. When I pointed out that we could always just kill Davis later if/when these doubts were laid to rest, he said (a not uncommon response), "Who'd want to rot in prison being raped, poor health, etc.?" I replied that first Davis certainly didn't want to die and then it was, "Well of course *he* didn't want die." Then I pointed out that awful prison conditions aren't a *given*, they're just how we do things here. He scoffed very rudely and said "Where isn't it like that?" and demanded statistics on incarceration rates throughout the 'First World'.
He doesn't see anything wrong with his line of reasoning, that killing this guy should be okay because our prisons make life less appealing than death?
Or that, if it wasn't already profoundly obvious, davis is obviously one who would prefer not to die, answering his own question?
quote:"I'm kind of numb. I can't believe that it's really happened," MacPhail's mother, Anneliese MacPhail, said in a telephone interview from her home in Columbus, Ga. "All the feelings of relief and peace I've been waiting for all these years, they will come later. I certainly do want some peace."
All this relief I've been expecting for all these years!...not here yet, but I'm sure it's coming!...I hope...
quote: She dismissed Davis' claims of innocence.
"He's been telling himself that for 22 years. You know how it is, he can talk himself into anything."
He's not the only one so gifted.
edit: I'm probably going to regret writing the above, I just don't think there is any sense of decorum in talking to the media about something like that. The man's dead, you finally got what you were looking for, but his family has spent just as much time convinced he isn't guilty and trying to save him.
Have the decency to be sensitive to their feelings. Though I suppose this has been such a long time building, it's probably hard to evaluate just how the heck one feels about it.
double edit: Didn't even see this when I posted.
quote:"I will grieve for the Davis family because now they're going to understand our pain and our hurt," she said in a telephone interview from Jackson. "My prayers go out to them. I have been praying for them all these years. And I pray there will be some peace along the way for them."
*throws hands up and walks away*
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Did this actually happen?
quote:Why oh why is mother of the poor murdered Savannah cop doing live comment on CNN about execution? This is indecent - like whole thing
I feel safer, don't you?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
What a strange set of prayers for a Christian. "I pray that the family finds some peace once the vengeance I've been praying for is enacted."
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: ... My prayers go out to them. I have been praying for them all these years. And I pray there will be some peace along the way for them.
Weird
What would the prior prayers have been like? "I pray that Troy Davis' family does well. Just not so well that they actually get him back or anything. Maybe they should just worry less about him or something."
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:edit: I'm probably going to regret writing the above, I just don't think there is any sense of decorum in talking to the media about something like that.
There's nothing to regret; Anneliese MacPhail has been vindictively ghoulish over this whole affair, and needs to shut up.
The fact that she's said that she basically had to have this guy get executed, like a sacrifice on the altar of her vengeance, as a mere prerequisite to even being able to find peace, is just about the most pitiable thing imaginable. Hell, the family of the black guy who got road-hauled to death by the white supremacist executed on the same day — it was a much more twisted act, extremely reveled in, and they knew not to let hate for the accused twist them up into this madness.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:edit: I'm probably going to regret writing the above, I just don't think there is any sense of decorum in talking to the media about something like that.
There's nothing to regret; Anneliese MacPhail has been vindictively ghoulish over this whole affair, and needs to shut up.
The fact that she's said that she basically had to have this guy get executed, like a sacrifice on the altar of her vengeance, as a mere prerequisite to even being able to find peace, is just about the most pitiable thing imaginable. Hell, the family of the black guy who got road-hauled to death by the white supremacist executed on the same day — it was a much more twisted act, extremely reveled in, and they knew not to let hate for the accused twist them up into this madness.
I was actually let down that the media didn't cover the other execution. I know there was more controversy over Troy Davis, but the other execution was for a man who committed a crime a hundred times worse.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! That's costing us *hundreds* of dollars a year! Unconscionable!
When will these godless commie bleeding heart atheists realize: we can do *whatever we want* to these awful scumbags. In fact we *should*!
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
When you kill people as often as Texas does, costs add up fast.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
That is *a lot* of wasted food. I'm not saying we should do away with it. Buy maybe, since we are already executing them, we should just force feed those who lose their appetites?
>: )
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Kinda makes me wonder what my last meal would be if I was in such a position.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
I'll take a large stay of execution with a side of escape.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: I'll take a large stay of execution with a side of escape.
Followed by iced pardon for dessert right?
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: What a strange set of prayers for a Christian. "I pray that the family finds some peace once the vengeance I've been praying for is enacted."
I don't have a high opinion of Christianity, and people like this are the easy ones to point to as the reason.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: What a strange set of prayers for a Christian. "I pray that the family finds some peace once the vengeance I've been praying for is enacted."
I don't have a high opinion of Christianity, and people like this are the easy ones to point to as the reason.
*nods head* and 9/11 hijackers are the easy reason Islam is just silly, also Mao Ze Dong for atheism, and Dr. Wiley for science!
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: I'll take a large stay of execution with a side of escape.
That's kind of like the, "if I had a genie in a bottle, I'd ask for three more wishes." No, excepting the explosive shark-fin soup that blows you out of prison, I'm more interested in the kinds of thoughts that goes through your mind at that point.
Do you order everything you ever wanted? Do you try not to, just in case someone needs to clean up after you die? Do you have an appetite to eat? etc.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
quote:I don't have a high opinion of Christianity, and people like this are the easy ones to point to as the reason.
As a non-Christian, I used to judge Christianity that way. I don't anymore. To me, people like that are just 'Christian in name only'.
I think I'd order chocolate for my last meal. Chocolate cake, ice cream, hot chocolate... I can always somehow eat chocolate, no matter how bad things get.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:To me, people like that are just 'Christian in name only'.
There's enough of them that the I've found the term "Christian" to be meaningless when assessing the character of a person who claims the label for themselves.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: I'll take a large stay of execution with a side of escape.
That's kind of like the, "if I had a genie in a bottle, I'd ask for three more wishes."
I haven't really been following the case closely, but did Troy Davis deny having shot the man earlier in the day?
If he didn't, then it doesn't seem to matter much to me whether he was the one who killed the cop with the gun. It was pure luck that the person shot earlier in the day didn't die. The morality of the act of shooting someone doesn't change based on whether the person you shot lives or dies.
Of course, I'm against the death penalty entirely, so whether he was guilty or not I'd still be in favor of clemency. Still, it seems odd to spend so much mental effort over someone with "the person he shot earlier in the day lived, but the person that was shot later that day with the same gun died; and he might not have been the one that pulled the trigger that time."
I'm probably just missing something though.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
Xavier, the thing is, you don't get the death penalty for shooting someone. It has to be special circumstances, such as a cop, child, multiple people, particularly heinous, etc. Most offenses simple don't qualify for execution. So, executing him for a lesser offense is an issue. That other offense was not deemed worthy of death penalty. If you allow killing someone because they committed another crime, you can get to absurd areas. I heard a quote from Perry regarding the innocent guy Texas executed where Perry said, well, he wasn't innocent. He was convicted of beating his wife once.
We don't execute people for one time domestic abuse charges. Likewise, we don't execute for attempted murder or even most murders. We hold a higher requirement for an execution worthy offense. If you allow guilt on a lesser crime to justify execution based on a later worse crime, where does that end? if I can prove a guy shoplifted and I think he might have come back later and killed the clerk in a horrendous matter, can I dismiss the reasonable doubt on the murder charge since the shoplifting charge is ironclad? Can I feel right in that execution?
Posted by Anthonie (Member # 884) on :
quote:Originally posted by Xavier: I haven't really been following the case closely, but did Troy Davis deny having shot the man earlier in the day?
If he didn't, then it doesn't seem to matter much to me whether he was the one who killed the cop with the gun. It was pure luck that the person shot earlier in the day didn't die. The morality of the act of shooting someone doesn't change based on whether the person you shot lives or dies.
Of course, I'm against the death penalty entirely, so whether he was guilty or not I'd still be in favor of clemency. Still, it seems odd to spend so much mental effort over someone with "the person he shot earlier in the day lived, but the person that was shot later that day with the same gun died; and he might not have been the one that pulled the trigger that time."
I'm probably just missing something though.
Unfortunately, our justice system must often dispense penalties based on the OUTCOME of crime rather than the ACTION.
Think of the Matthew Shepard murder in Wyoming: officials waited to see whether Matthew would live or die before they made final charges. Upon his death several days after his brutal beating, his assailants, Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson, were charged with murder rather than some lesser assault charge. Whether Matthew had died or not did not alter the ACTIONS of the attackers.
In recent years, I often pondered deeply about this issue. What should be scrutinized by Justice: our actions/intentions or the outcomes of our actions? It's fuzzy and messy to me.
To personalize the issue for clarity (and this is personal, but I have learned to talk about it), let me share why I pondered this. I very seriously and deliberately attempted suicide [twice ]. I am alive today, honestly, by sheer luck. (Please note, just to be clear I am VERY VERY grateful and happy to be alive.) I felt extreme survivor guilt, and wondered very seriously about my state with God. According to my religious beliefs at that time, I considered suicide akin to murder. My thoughts went something like, "Other people have done exactly the same ACTIONS as I did, but those other people died. So how is it that they are self-murderers, but I am not? We did the same thing with the same intention, so, in God's eyes, how can we not be the same?" I believed for some time that to God I WAS the same and considered myself a self-murderer. That was a very hard time for me. [Note: since then I have changed and learned a lot, and I in no way believe anything remotely like that now.]
After worrying about that question for far too long, I never reached any reasonable conclusion about whether actions/intentions or outcomes matter more in the application of justice. [However, I did learn that dwelling on the question for the reasons I was was very unhealthy.]
[ September 25, 2011, 02:06 AM: Message edited by: Anthonie ]
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
BB,
quote: All this relief I've been expecting for all these years!...not here yet, but I'm sure it's coming!...I hope...
Have you ever been in any kind of similar situation? She has been living with this day in and day out for years and now the waiting part of her life is over. Can you even imagine what living with this would be like for 22 years? It is completely understandable that she would be numb. I think if you really took a moment and thought about it, you can see how she could feel numb.
quote: "I will grieve for the Davis family because now they're going to understand our pain and our hurt," she said in a telephone interview from Jackson. "My prayers go out to them. I have been praying for them all these years. And I pray there will be some peace along the way for them." *throws hands up and walks away*
I think you might be taking what she said in a different way than she intended. It makes sense for her to grieve for the family because she understands that they lost a son too. That doesn't mean she believes that Davis shouldn't have died but it will cause the family to suffer. Losing a child for any reason must be hard on parents.
Mucus
quote: What would the prior prayers have been like? "I pray that Troy Davis' family does well. Just not so well that they actually get him back or anything. Maybe they should just worry less about him or something."
Really? You don't see why someone would pray for the family? Does that mean she should be heaping scorn upon the entire family for what their son was convicted of doing? This does make absolute sense. The parents had nothing to do with the crime yet they are affected by it too.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:I think you might be taking what she said in a different way than she intended.
"I will grieve for the Davis family because now they're going to understand our pain and our hurt,"
It doesn't matter what she's intending, even if her record doesn't show her being consistently ugly about this whole affair. This is just a breathlessly offensive statement in and of itself.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
DarkKnight, I don't really understand why you're advocating for benefit of the doubt here and best possible interpretation. She advocated, hard, for the death of someone she didn't know was guilty, her claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
No one really gets to 'pray for the family' *after* they've spent a lot of time praying (and working) for the thing the family needs prayers *for*, and be taken as much besides a hypocrite.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: It doesn't matter what she's intending, even if her record doesn't show her being consistently ugly about this whole affair. This is just a breathlessly offensive statement in and of itself.
Of course it matters what she's intending. Her record shows that she stands by the conviction and the sentence. While you may feel differently about the punishment for someone killing your child, she believes that his conviction and sentence was right. The statement says that she is grieving for the family because she knows they lost a son too. That is not an offensive statement.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: DarkKnight, I don't really understand why you're advocating for benefit of the doubt here and best possible interpretation. She advocated, hard, for the death of someone she didn't know was guilty, her claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
No one really gets to 'pray for the family' *after* they've spent a lot of time praying (and working) for the thing the family needs prayers *for*, and be taken as much besides a hypocrite.
I don't understand why you and many others are out to demonize a woman who did nothing wrong. She did not try him in court. She did not convict him. She did not sentence him to death. She did not kill him. She did not cause court after court after court to uphold the conviction and sentence. Why is it her fault that he was sentenced to death? She cannot make the courts do anything no matter how hard she advocates. How is it wrong for someone to pray for the family of a convicted murderer? Is it possible that because you believe an innocent man was murdered that you want to make someone you think is responsible for it into an evil person?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Really? You're suggesting that the advocacy of a victim's family is to be expected to carry *no weight* with, for example, parole boards? Am I understanding you properly?
No, she didn't try him, or convict him, or execute him. As I said, she advocated long and hard for the execution of someone she didn't know to be guilty. I don't think she's responsible for it, but I think she helped in a small political way. I understand why, but that doesn't change the fact of what she did, either, which is stated above. I don't think she's an evil woman, I don't know near enough about her overall to have a thought on that. I do think she lent her support to a profoundly evil action, though.
And it's still more than a little absurd to pray and work hard for someone's death, and *then* when it's done say, "Now I pray for the family." As asked before, what was that prayer *like*? What mental acrobatics needed to take place? "Lord, now that my prayers for Davis's death have been answered, please help the Davis family deal with the death I prayed so hard for. Amen."
I don't suggest she's a hypocrite in her own mind or anything. Few people do, after all. But just because someone doesn't think they're behaving in a contradictory way doesn't mean they aren't.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:I don't understand why you and many others are out to demonize a woman who did nothing wrong.
You clearly don't understand why we are 'out to demonize' her (which is a pretty incorrect way to say 'why we are critical of her behavior,' by the way).
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
Are you suggesting that she was able to sway a judge, jury, parole board, the Georgia Supreme Court, the 11th Circuit Court, the Supreme Court, and various other courts, including a rehearing of the evidence, because of her advocacy? Her advocacy was that powerful? Is she more profoundly evil than all of the jurors, judges, parole board members, including the United States Supreme Court? Is her 'small political way' in all of this worse than all of the judicial system? It baffles me why you would focus on her when you even admit she could only have done some small political part. Shouldn't you be going after someone like Judge William Moore? Or the Georgia court system? or the prosecutors? Or Cole for not taking the stand? or Davis for not calling to the stand some of the witnesses who recanted? Isn't that profoundly more evil than a mother who lost her son? Why aren't you going after Spencer Lawton who must be the most evil person involved in this. He has made statements like "We have consistently won the case as it has been presented in court. We have consistently lost the case as it has been presented in the public realm, on TV and elsewhere."
It does make sense to pray for the sentence of a convicted murderer to be carried out and pray for peace for the family of the murderer. That is not contradictory at all. What would you do in her shoes? Granted, you believe an innocent man was executed so you would have to believe that a guilty man was set to be executed. Would you pray for the family to be hurt? Would you want them to not find any peace? Most likely you are against the death penalty so it will effect your response.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Is she more profoundly evil than all of the jurors, judges, parole board members, including the United States Supreme Court?
If you're going to vehemently assault a standpoint, make sure it even remotely resembles one we're making.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: You clearly don't understand why we are 'out to demonize' her (which is a pretty incorrect way to say 'why we are critical of her behavior,' by the way).
This statement is pretty much contradicted by:
quote: There's nothing to regret; Anneliese MacPhail has been vindictively ghoulish over this whole affair, and needs to shut up.
The fact that she's said that she basically had to have this guy get executed, like a sacrifice on the altar of her vengeance, as a mere prerequisite to even being able to find peace, is just about the most pitiable thing imaginable. Hell, the family of the black guy who got road-hauled to death by the white supremacist executed on the same day — it was a much more twisted act, extremely reveled in, and they knew not to let hate for the accused twist them up into this madness.
You are using hyperbole (a sacrifice on the altar of her vengeance) to portray her as an ugly hateful woman. Yet nothing like that is said about Spencer Lawton, only the grieving mother.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
DarkKnight: I think you're under some kind of misunderstanding. Two at least.
First, we're not mandated to only discuss those that are most evil. Rather, the conversation has just been flowing along and her statement has jumped out both due to the strangeness of it and the way that she has entered it into the public conversation through live comment on CNN or whatever.
Second, we're not mandated to discuss things in order of either their strangeness or their evilness.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: If you're going to vehemently assault a standpoint, make sure it even remotely resembles one we're making.
It completely resembles the point Rakeesh was making.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
DarkKnight,
First of all, nowhere did I suggest that she could have, through her own oratory, swayed the outcome one way or another. Your stance was at first to imply that what she said had *no* impact-and this still seems strange to me-and now to suggest that unless she was *decisive*, her words shouldn't be criticized. I wasn't aware that one should be free from blame or credit for supporting something that was going to happen anyway. It's a strange stance you're making there, even if we grant for the sake of argument she had no impact.
The other thing, as others have said, is that by no means am I blaming her exclusively, nor is there any obligation to *only* speak of other, more powerful actors in this farce.
As a different issue, it's a strange sort of Christian faith indeed which prays for someone to be executed after a crime has been committed. So in order for me to put myself in her place, I'd have to embrace *that* contradiction, too. I can easily understand it-she was convinced the guy killed her boy. Perfectly natural to want him dead. It's when *prayer* comes into it, followed by prayer for the family, that things fall apart.
I understand the reasoning she might well be using. But what it amounts to is her on the one hand saying, "I want him dead," but on the *other* hand praying for the family when it happens. DK, are you still going to insist there's no contradiction here, man? I know it makes sense *to her*. That's not the point.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:She has been living with this day in and day out for years and now the waiting part of her life is over.
I don't understand this at all. What had she been living with that she isn't still living with now that Davis is dead?
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: What a strange set of prayers for a Christian. "I pray that the family finds some peace once the vengeance I've been praying for is enacted."
I don't have a high opinion of Christianity, and people like this are the easy ones to point to as the reason.
*nods head* and 9/11 hijackers are the easy reason Islam is just silly, also Mao Ze Dong for atheism, and Dr. Wiley for science!
I said easy, not appropriate.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by DarkKnight: [QUOTE]You are using hyperbole (a sacrifice on the altar of her vengeance) to portray her as an ugly hateful woman. Yet nothing like that is said about Spencer Lawton, only the grieving mother.
As mucus said, we're not mandated to discuss things in order of either their strangeness or their evilness.
quote:Originally posted by DarkKnight: It completely resembles the point Rakeesh was making.
No. Rakeesh is not saying — nor, not without pointedly poor reading comprehension, should he be read to say — something that makes it a question whether Rakeesh's point relies on 'she is more profoundly evil than all of the jurors, judges, parole board members, including the United States Supreme Court.'
This is not ambiguous.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
More on the last meals in Texas. A former inmate who managed to start a successful restaurant after being released has offered to prepare and pay for the last meals himself. Texas said no. So, not about the money.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anthonie: After worrying about that question for far too long, I never reached any reasonable conclusion about whether actions/intentions or outcomes matter more in the application of justice.
First I want to say, thank you for sharing something so personal, and that while I don't know you, I too am happy that you are alive.
As to the question of intent vs outcome, until we have the kind of technology which could go back in time to when a crime was committed and scan the brain of the accused, (which is unlikely, ever) we should really stick with outcome influenced by intent. Of course, there are just so many differences between the concept of heavenly and earthly justice. I personally don't believe in any of the widely accepted visages of God, so my thoughts on the "heavenly" side are...unique?...well, not common.
Regardless when it comes to our imperfect system here in the really real meat space, I think intent should be taken into account, but not the only thing taken into account. As an example, if someone tried to rob a bank with an airsoft gun, but unknowingly a guard in response to the artificial threat shot the robber, but the bullet missed and hit a bystander, killing them, wouldn't the robber still be responsible for that death, despite their intention to not use lethal force?
Intent and outcome should be both taken into consideration I say.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Oh, and as to the victim's mother controversy...you ask, what would her prayer be like? How about this? "Dear God, may my son's killer be brought to legal justice. Amen." Followed by: "Dear God, please let the family of my son's legally executed killer feel your comfort in this, their hour of need."
I'm not saying the guy was guilty or not, nor that he should have been killed or not. Just that some of your criticisms of this women may be inappropriate and judgmental. When it comes to people's pain, and people's faith that kind of judgment and condemnation rarely help improve the situation.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: More on the last meals in Texas. A former inmate who managed to start a successful restaurant after being released has offered to prepare and pay for the last meals himself. Texas said no. So, not about the money.
The pretense of it being about money is laughable anyway. The cost of the one meal isn't likely equal to the cost of imprisoning a death row inmate for a day. Even a really expensive meal.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Yes, Stone_Wolf, as has been repeatedly noted, I (nor anyone else, I think) is claiming she is, in her own mind with regards to herself, a blatant hypocrite. The (unrecognized) contradiction comes first when as a Christian praying that someone be killed, and then praying that the person's family be 'comforted'.
All of that, by the way, is *before* the troubling remark about 'now they know how I feel'. But even without that, it's still a glaring contradiction, which isn't surprising given we're talking about the death penalty in America in general and Christians *praying* for it in particular.
As for being judgmental, well, obviously. Is there some requirement that when one understands how someone could think a certain way, they're free from criticism for It? Does that extend to advocating the execution of someone we don't know is guilty?
----
As for the last meal business, heh, I was pretty convinced (totally convinced, really) that the fiscal justification was a cop out. Didn't expect to be proven right so soon, though. We're much safer from violent crime now than we've been in past generations, but the impulse to savagery and unspoken sadism in our country towards criminals-once we've incarcerated them-is just so strange.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
I think I'm with Xav on this on. I haven't followed the case in detail, but from what I can tell, there are several facts that are not in dispute.
Earlier that day, Troy Davis shot someone in the face. Troy was present and directly involved in Mark Allen MacPhail's murder. But there is some doubt if he was the one who actually pulled the trigger.
I'm ambivalent about the death penalty, but this is not striking me as a great one to argue on. Troy Davis was, by no stretch of the imagination, innocent. He may not have been guilty of pulling the trigger and was just instrumental in the killing, not the direct cause of it. He also was guilty of earlier trying to kill someone else.
If justice was technically violated, yes, that's a problem, but I don't find tears in me for Troy Davis. In the best case, he was an attempted murderer and an accessory to murder, who seems to never have accepted responsibility for his crimes.
And, I gotta say, I'm amazed that you think your demonization of the victim's family is appropriate. Have you tried to see it from their point of view at all?
First off, there's what I pointed out above. Combine that with the original trial, where Troy Davis's guilt seemed iron clad. The family's narrative about this event was fixed by this.
With many cases where death penalty was overturned, there are instances where the convicted person was completely innocent and not at all involved with the killing and the family still was absolutely convinced that they did it. And this is not because they are monsters.
But this wasn't even like that. What you are condemning them for is that, many years after the seemingly obvious conviction, some aspects of the situation changed and introduced reasonable doubt that Troy Davis didn't pull the trigger and they still wanted his execution to go through. Let's leave aside the fixation of the narrative. This isn't a case where we know that Davis was innocent, just that there was some doubt that he was the actual murder and not just an accessory. Somehow, to you, the family didn't change their desire for him to be put to death in response to this makes them bad people. I don't see the logic in that.
One final thing. I'm pretty sure if, let's say, a bunch of guys attacked my wife and one of them ended up killing her with all the rest helping but not directly killing her, I would want them all to die. Were I in the McPhail's horrible situation, even if I knew that Troy Davis only helped in the killing and didn't do it himself, I'd want him to die. I don't think that makes me a bad person.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:The (unrecognized) contradiction comes first when as a Christian praying that someone be killed, and then praying that the person's family be 'comforted'.
I don't see the logic that seems so clear to you on this. This doesn't look like an obvious contradiction or hypocrisy to me at all.
They want justice to be done, but they are aware that people unrelated to this justice being carried out are going to suffer because of it and they want that suffering to be a little as possible. From what I can tell, for you to not seem them as hypocrites, they'd need to either forgo justice because it would cause others pain or to not care about the suffering of Troy Davis' family.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Yes, Rakeesh, as has been repeatedly noted by myself and others...bla bla bla...did I say anything about her not being a hypocrite "in her own mind"? Nope. You guys asked, "What would this horrible ghoulish hypocrite's prayer possibly look like?" Asked and answered.
She wasn't praying for him to be shanked in the exercise yard or gang raped in the shower. She wanted legal punishment for the man convicted of her son's murder. Again...not saying -I- think he should have been executed or not.
As much as you would like to declare that this is a "glaring contradiction" and have it be accepted as such, some do not see it that way. Of course I see why you think what you think, but is there some requirement that when one understands how someone could think a certain way, they're free from criticism for it?
Her son was murdered, she wanted justice AND wanted the family of her son's (in her eyes) murderer to have comfort. Evil bitch! Jesh!
[ September 27, 2011, 10:58 AM: Message edited by: Stone_Wolf_ ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: ... but from what I can tell, there are several facts that are not in dispute.
Earlier that day, Troy Davis shot someone in the face.
I think you start running off the rails here. Even this much is already in dispute.
quote:In the hours before the shooting of Officer McPhail there was a party in the nearby neighbourhood of Cloverdale, Savannah. As Michael Cooper and a group of friends were leaving the party in their car, shots were fired, wounding Cooper. Troy Davis was convicted of aggravated assault for the shooting.
At the trial, Darrell Collins repudiated his initial statement to the police that Troy Davis had shot at the car. He testified that he had not seen Troy Davis with a gun on the night of the shooting. Michael Cooper testified that he had not seen who shot him. In a 2002 affidavit (below), he repudiates a statement he allegedly gave to police implicating Troy Davis. Benjamin Gordon testified that he had not seen who shot Cooper, contrary to a statement he gave to police after the crime. In a 2003 affidavit (below) he states that the statement he gave to police (when he was 15) had been coerced. Craig Young testified at trial that a statement he gave to police in which he stated that Troy Davis had threatened some guests at the Cloverdale party and that Davis had told him that he had fought with another guest were false and coerced by the police.
quote:Michael Cooper was shot and wounded on leaving the Cloverdale party. Troy Davis was convicted of the shooting at his trial for the murder of Officer McPhail which happened later the same night. In his affidavit, Michael Cooper states that: "I have had a chance to review a statement which I supposedly gave to police officers on June 25, 1991. I remember that they asked a lot of questions and typed up a statement which they told me to sign. I did not read the statement before I signed. In fact, I have not seen it before today. In that statement, the police said that I told them that Mark [Wilds] told me that Troy shot me. I never told the police that. Mark never said that to me. What is written in that statement is a lie. I do not know who shot me that night. I do not know it now, and I did not know it then."
quote:I'm ambivalent about the death penalty, but this is not striking me as a great one to argue on. Troy Davis was, by no stretch of the imagination, innocent. He may not have been guilty of pulling the trigger and was just instrumental in the killing, not the direct cause of it. He also was guilty of earlier trying to kill someone else.
If justice was technically violated, yes, that's a problem, but I don't find tears in me for Troy Davis. In the best case, he was an attempted murderer and an accessory to murder, who seems to never have accepted responsibility for his crimes.
I thought it went without saying (and I'm frankly a little irritated that it's being suggested otherwise), but I don't think Davis was a saint, nor would I have called him 'innocent', or anything else. From what I can tell, he seems pretty sleazy. To me, that's not the point. The point is the 'technicality' about there being reasonable doubt as to whether he actually committed the crime for which he was executed.
quote:And, I gotta say, I'm amazed that you think your demonization of the victim's family is appropriate. Have you tried to see it from their point of view at all?
Yes, I have. I've said more than once that I understand why they've acted the way they have in this case. I think I've said so at least three times. I believe I even called it 'natural'.
quote:With many cases where death penalty was overturned, there are instances where the convicted person was completely innocent and not at all involved with the killing and the family still was absolutely convinced that they did it. And this is not because they are monsters.
I'm struggling to remember where I said or even implied they were monsters.
quote:But this wasn't even like that. What you are condemning them for is that, many years after the seemingly obvious conviction, some aspects of the situation changed and introduced reasonable doubt that Troy Davis didn't pull the trigger and they still wanted his execution to go through. Let's leave aside the fixation of the narrative. This isn't a case where we know that Davis was innocent, just that there was some doubt that he was the actual murder and not just an accessory. Somehow, to you, the family didn't change their desire for him to be put to death in response to this makes them bad people. I don't see the logic in that.
I didn't say they were 'bad people', either. Just that I feel we ought to be sure in death penalty cases, and that they (the family) couldn't be sure despite whatever they may have told themselves, and still spoke out in favor of executing him. I am critical of that behavior, yes. I don't think it's 'demonizing' them, nor do I think it makes them monsters. In fact, as stated, I find it understandable and natural.
quote:One final thing. I'm pretty sure if, let's say, a bunch of guys attacked my wife and one of them ended up killing her with all the rest helping but not directly killing her, I would want them all to die. Were I in the McPhail's horrible situation, even if I knew that Troy Davis only helped in the killing and didn't do it himself, I'd want him to die. I don't think that makes me a bad person.
Well, yeah. Nor would I. Again, that's not the point.
And, since it seems everything must be spelled out clearly in this thread-I don't think she or her family was near the top of the list of people for whom this ought to be pinned on. The only reason I even started speaking about them was because they made public statements themselves.
quote:They want justice to be done, but they are aware that people unrelated to this justice being carried out are going to suffer because of it and they want that suffering to be a little as possible. From what I can tell, for you to not seem them as hypocrites, they'd need to either forgo justice because it would cause others pain or to not care about the suffering of Troy Davis' family.
Again, I realize they are almost certainly not hypocrites in their own eyes. Who is? The problem is that...well, no, they didn't want justice to be done. What they wanted was Davis to be executed. That appears to have been unjust, for all that it was a 'technicality' (one wonders what the law is besides a bunch of technicalities). That's one reason there's a contradiction. The other reason is that praying for something to happen that isn't necessary-that need not happen-and then praying for the outcome of that thing to be mitigated strikes me as a contradiction, that's all. Trying to have one's cake and eat it too.
----------
Stone_Wolf,
quote:Yes, Rakeesh, as has been repeatedly noted by myself and others...bla bla bla...did I say anything about her not being a hypocrite "in her own mind"? Nope. You guys asked, "What would this horrible ghoulish hypocrite's prayer possibly look like?" Asked and answered.
Dude, don't get snippy with me. You were suggesting that I thought it was impossible or something that she could've thought and prayed in ways that made her anything other than a hypocrite, when I've posted repeatedly on the subject.
quote:She wasn't praying for him to be shanked in the exercise yard or gang raped in the shower. She wanted legal punishment for the man convicted of her son's murder. Again...not saying -I- think he should have been executed or not.
Well, no she didn't, it seems. I know she thought she did. But I can think the sky is green and the grass is blue, and really deep down believe it-but my belief is still wrong.
quote:Her son was murdered, she wanted justice AND wanted the family of her son's (in her eyes) murderer to have comfort. Evil bitch! Jesh!
Yeah, because I totally suggested she was anything approaching an evil bitch. I can only imagine how snarky and upset you'd get if I started putting words in your mouth in this fashion, dude. Demands that I not speak to you. Suggestions of bullying and victimization. Etc. As for me, it just rankles and I ask that you read what I've actually written rather than what it feels like I've written.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Default Rakeesh response to anything I say:
"What I've and other have been saying that you don't understand is..."
"How dare you say that I said this, if I ever said something like that you would bla bla bla bla."
Get over it. Move on already. Your responses to me are getting so uniformly, boringly predictable that I don't have to actually read them to know what you are going to say.
I think you and Samp and others were too harsh on this women and her praying for the family wasn't an obvious, glaring contradiction...because no matter what else can be said of this execution, it was the legal punishment of a convicted murder. That he shouldn't have been convicted or executed may be a topic of legitimate discussion in itself but the idea that the mother of the victim is somehow morally contradictory for praying for that outcome AND for comfort to his family isn't true is MY point, one you simply haven't addressed, nor do I expect you to. It is much easier to wave your hands at heaven about how unfair I am to you and how I would react were you to treat me so poorly.
Bleh!
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:Get over it. Move on already. Your responses to me are getting so uniformly, boringly predictable that I don't have to actually read them to know what you are going to say.
Yes, I know.
As for not addressing your point, I can tell that the above paragraph is true, because I have addressed it, at least three times now. It's clear, though, that when you see my name to the left of a post, your eyes aren't as involved anymore. Nice of you to admit it, I suppose.
Anyway, look. You're putting words into my mouth, words I've actually said the *opposite* of, and your claim that I'm not addressing some point you've made is flat-out wrong as well. I know this because I *just* addressed them, and *just* looked over the thread to see if I'd said something like you suggested. It's a short thread. Either actually *read* what I've posted, or don't. But it'll be obvious either way.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
I think everyone needs to chill out a little bit.
It's perhaps a little off-topic, but I keep being reminded of this woman as a counterpoint to some of the behavior of the MacPhail family members:
quote: when Zacharias Moussaoui was indited on six counts of conspiracy to commit terrorism, and the U.S. government called for a death penalty for him, if convicted, my husband and I spoke out in opposition to that, publicly. Through that and through human rights groups, we were brought together with several other victims' families.
When I saw Aicha in the media, coming over when her son was indited, and I thought, "What a brave woman. Someday I want to meet that woman when I'm stronger." I was still in deep grief; I knew I didn't have the strength. I knew I would find her someday, or we would find each other.
Because, when people heard that my son was a victim, I got immediate sympathy. But when people learned what her son was accused of, she didn't get that sympathy. But her suffering is equal to mine.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Huh...I missed the word "have" as in, "I don't -have- to read them"...although even with that missing word the meaning is clear.
This may come as a huge shock to your ego, but I don't only write things for your benefit. It was Samp who said most of the stuff I was referencing.
As to what you haven't addressed...where is the contradiction in praying for justice for your son and praying for comfort to the family of the executed?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Stone_Wolf, the contradiction (and bear in mind that the human mind and heart are capable of contradiction) is rather like saying, "I am going to encourage these people to punch you in the gut but I hope that it doesn't hurt you." What ever her reasons for advocating the punching.
Also, You keep saying legally convicted. That is not the same as rightly or justly convicted so I am not sure why you keep saying it.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
It's actually pretty fascinating and really, really makes me question Perry's qualifications for being president. Despite being presented with evidence based on new science that completely contradicted earlier findings in the case, he totally dismissed the new science and said it changed nothing. An innocent man appears to have been executed.
The sequence of events appears to be a pretty damning example of the problem with the judicial system when it comes to capital punishment, and it's cases like this that make me anti-capital punishment.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Boots, the reason I say legally is in response to Rakeesh saying
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: She advocated, hard, for the death of someone she didn't know was guilty...
(emphasis mine). Morally it -should- be enough for the victim's family for the person to be convicted. People have been criticizing the mother of the victim for calling for a legal punishment and I say it's bull hokey. Lay off the lady, her son got shot to death for heaven's sake! That she has room in her heart for compassion for the family of the man she believes murdered her son is something that shouldn't be something that people criticize her for.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Hey, wait a tick tock, I did include the word "have to"...Rocket punch!
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:In the hours before the shooting of Officer McPhail there was a party in the nearby neighbourhood of Cloverdale, Savannah. As Michael Cooper and a group of friends were leaving the party in their car, shots were fired, wounding Cooper. Troy Davis was convicted of aggravated assault for the shooting.
At the trial, Darrell Collins repudiated his initial statement to the police that Troy Davis had shot at the car. He testified that he had not seen Troy Davis with a gun on the night of the shooting. Michael Cooper testified that he had not seen who shot him. In a 2002 affidavit (below), he repudiates a statement he allegedly gave to police implicating Troy Davis. Benjamin Gordon testified that he had not seen who shot Cooper, contrary to a statement he gave to police after the crime. In a 2003 affidavit (below) he states that the statement he gave to police (when he was 15) had been coerced. Craig Young testified at trial that a statement he gave to police in which he stated that Troy Davis had threatened some guests at the Cloverdale party and that Davis had told him that he had fought with another guest were false and coerced by the police.
Wait a second.... Troy Davis didn't shoot the guy in the car, yet the same bullet casings were found at the McPhail crime scene. Was the gun like the evil version of the Sword of Gryffindor or something?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: This may come as a huge shock to your ego, but I don't only write things for your benefit. It was Samp who said most of the stuff I was referencing.
Oh my god, quit simpering at rakeesh. I don't know what caused you to be so uniformly immature in response to him in particular discussing things with you, but I suppose it's worth noting that I could have much the same problems with your reference.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Geraine: Two things a) The ballistics evidence was already part of the appeals process which yielded this
quote: Prosecutors said Davis first fired shots at a pool party in Savannah's Cloverdale neighborhood, hitting a man in the face, and then later shot and killed MacPhail. But forensics experts have now shown that the ballistics testimony is no longer reliable, the filing said. ... The order signed by Judge Wilson today said that claims being pursued by Davis had previously been raised and rejected. As for the ballistics evidence, the order said, a federal court judge had previously found that there was never a definitive contention at trial that the bullets matched and that the munitions evidence was not relevant to Davis' guilt of the MacPhail murder.
b) I was mainly responding to the statement "there are several facts that are not in dispute" in order to clarify what is actually in dispute. If we can't agree even on what is under dispute in the beginning, then any reasoning we're doing is often pretty inapplicable.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Boots, the reason I say legally is in response to Rakeesh saying
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: She advocated, hard, for the death of someone she didn't know was guilty...
(emphasis mine). Morally it -should- be enough for the victim's family for the person to be convicted. People have been criticizing the mother of the victim for calling for a legal punishment and I say it's bull hokey. Lay off the lady, her son got shot to death for heaven's sake! That she has room in her heart for compassion for the family of the man she believes murdered her son is something that shouldn't be something that people criticize her for.
And those are just the ones one small center are sure about.
Not that this makes her evil, but there wasn't enough compassion for the Davis family in her heart to crowd out the desire for vengeance that was taking up most of the room.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
For the record:
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: "What would this horrible ghoulish hypocrite's prayer possibly look like?"
= 100% fair.
quote: Evil bitch!
Over the top, apologies.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Not that this makes her evil, but there wasn't enough compassion for the Davis family in her heart to crowd out the desire for vengeance that was taking up most of the room.
So, if she had wanted him locked up for life, then her heart would have been filled with justice?
My point here is that losing your child is insanely devastating and this lady should be cut major slack...save your condemnations for our legal system, and your energy for trying to change it so that it better reflects your morals instead of harshly judging the mother of a murdered son who, despite whatever blood lust you feel filled her heart, still had enough compassion to give thought and prayer to the family of the man she believes ended the life of her child.
Because if it's my son, and I believe that this guy is the cause, I'm not waiting for the needle, I'm gunna spring him outa jail and build me an ice boat and grabbing the ol' dissolvable paper suit and rubber gloves!
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
More and more evidence you're not listening. Judging her harshly? I've said near a half dozen times now that her reaction is natural and completely understandable. But hey, it's got those few letters to the left of the post, and that means you get to turn your brain off and decide what I was actually saying. It's especially amusing because of how angry you've gotten in the past when you *thought* people were doing it to you.
Oh, and as has been mentioned *also* many times: I wasn't aware that I was blaming her solely, or that because I wasn't mentioning the justice system (which I DID, btw, very early on), that I'm somehow remiss.
There ain't anyone here who doesn't understand, and empathize, with why she has spoken and reacted this way. That doesn't magically mean it cannot be said she acted wrongly.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Stone_Wolf, You can cut someone slack - and most everyone here has done that - without saying that their actions are right or good. Your hypothetical response is understandable but that hardly makes it commendable.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Rakeesh: You are as boring as you are predictably off topic and personalizing (and then complaining about) comments not made to you. It was wrong of you to call her a hypocrite, in my opinion. There is not a contradiction nor is it hypocritical to wish for justice (which can be harsh and still be justice, considering the crime) and also wish comfort for others who have lost a son, by my estimation. For once try and stay on topic and not open each of your posts dismissing me and close them telling me what I would do.
Boots: I take your meaning...but when I say "cut her slack" I mean "don't criticize" not "heap compliments on her". Calling her a "hypocrite" (Rakeesh) or "ugly about it" and "vindictively ghoulish" (Samp) or "heart filled with vengeance" (You) is not in my book "cutting her some slack".
Did she respond in the most possibly empathetic, kind, understanding, Christian, loving, forgiving way? Obviously not. But until the day (which I hope beyond hope never happens) that I have to lay flowers on my son's grave and someone asks me my opinion of what they should do to the man convicted of his murder, I choose not to point at this unfortunate woman and say "She could have done better.".
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Samprimary and I were making *the same points*. Suggesting you weren't talking to me is ridiculous, and transparently disingenuous.
If you can't see *any* contradiction in praying for something to happen and then praying that the effects are mitigated...well. You're simply not being reasonable. You're operating from the assumption that I'm suggesting she's awful, or a total hypocrite, or something. You continually put words in people's mouths and then whine about their not being fair when speaking words they didn't say.
You're welcome to point, *specifically*, to where I've said or suggested the things you've claimed. Until then, I would prefer if you'd stop lying, which is what you're doing at this point, and suggest I 'stay on topic'. But I have no real expectation you will. As you've said, you don't even have to read what I post to know what I'm saying. (Please, by all means reconcile that with your insistence you're responding to what I'm actually saying.)
Just because she called it justice to herself doesn't make it justice. It is *unjust* to execute someone when you cannot be sure they committed the crime. She didn't know. That she claimed to, and was sure she did, isn't the same thing. She wasn't praying for justice, she was praying for something she thought was justice but wasn't.
Which, to head off your insistence otherwise, I don't think makes her a monster or an evil bitch or hateful or ununderstandable or villainous or or or.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
But she could have done better and many do. And perhaps they would not have if they hadn't been shown that certain actions are wrong. You can be sympathetic without agreeing or condoning. Our desire for vengeance is at least contributory to our acceptance of capital punishment - including the execution of those who have been wrongfully convicted. Pointing out the wrongness of vengeance is necessary to getting rid of it.
Posted by vegimo (Member # 12618) on :
I'd like to show you all what it looks like to have the desire for vengeance turn to forgiveness. [url= http://www.willsworld.com/~mvfhr/walt's.htm]Here[/url] is the story about my Father's twin brother, my Uncle Walt, and what happened to his son, my cousin, Scott. This is a Christian. I still can't fathom being able to make the decision he did, but I respect him for it.
The HUGE difference between the two cases? This guy had remorse, asked for forgiveness, and tried to follow through on the course of life that would progress from being truthful in those actions.
It does not directly correlate to the Davis case, but it does show some of the feelings that the victim's family goes through.
edited: for some reason I can't get the tag to work...tried again down here and it is putting an extra space in that I can't seem to get rid of.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Rakeesh: I find myself loosing my calm trying to deal with your continual character assassination...so I'll just skip to what I feel are your relevant points.
quote:If you can't see *any* contradiction in praying for something to happen and then praying that the effects are mitigated...well. You're simply not being reasonable.
I can see how you would feel that way, but I don't agree that her position is inherently contradictory nor that she is a hypocrite.
quote:You're operating from the assumption that I'm suggesting she's awful, or a total hypocrite, or something. You continually put words in people's mouths and then whine about their not being fair when speaking words they didn't say.
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: No one really gets to 'pray for the family' *after* they've spent a lot of time praying (and working) for the thing the family needs prayers *for*, and be taken as much besides a hypocrite.
You said it...Samp said she was "ugly about it" and "vindictively ghoulish"...and show me where I even mentioned (let alone whined about) anyone putting words in my mouth. You are continually dragging past arguments in the current, flippantly and offhandedly dismissing and misrepresenting what I have to say. And calling me a liar. Stay on topic! (Hint, the topic is not Stone_Wolf_) Take a hint from Boots, she manages to disagree with me without getting dragged into these little melodramas.
quote:Just because she called it justice to herself doesn't make it justice. It is *unjust* to execute someone when you cannot be sure they committed the crime. She didn't know. That she claimed to, and was sure she did, isn't the same thing. She wasn't praying for justice, she was praying for something she thought was justice but wasn't.
If there is a god who listens to our prayers and hears a mother call out in anguish for justice for her dead son, I doubt very highly that a southern state killed the wrong man (possibly) without giving him a fair trial and pretty much railroading him etc has anything to do with her prayers! That's the point you keep missing...her prayers for justice were either answered or not but utterly and completely irrelevant to the execution. She asked for justice, to God, and asked for comfort for Davis' family, to God...they are unrelated. She did not pray for the death of Troy Davis (as far as I've seen), she prayed for justice. Get me?
As to "evil bitch"...I apologized...and the only thing I've ever said -you- called her was a hypocrite, which you did! The only one here whining about having words put in their mouth is you! Stay on topic!
Boots: If you were a family friend of this lady, and took her aside and gently laid out why vengeance is wrong and hurts the seeker of vengeance as much as the recipient, I could go for the improvement argument. We are strangers discussing the topic on an internet chat board, and being intolerant of a woman in her situation doesn't stomp out vengeance, it's just classless and harsh in my opinion.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
I had views of how I would respond with regard to loved one being killed and turns out I was wrong. When my aunt was killed by a drunk driver, I cried for my aunt and I cried for the driver and his family. I could not write the letter my cousins wanted me to write- one calling for the man to rot in jail for the maximum time. Honestly, all I want is to somehow magically know that he will never drive drunk again and I would be fine freeing him from jail and letting him live his life. His life being destroyed does nothing to improve mine, to give me back a loved aunt. I want him to be a productive member of society, to receive the help he needs to be clean, to get a job and support his family. Overall, I think my tax dollars would be better spent on that goal than on getting vengeance. We would all be better off in the long run.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
In my opinion, taking her aside and telling her she is wrong is far more harmful than, from a distance, talking about her actions. I don't need to improve her so much as society in general.
If all she had done was pray for justice that would be one thing. But that is not all that she did. She publicly called for the death of another person. Those public statements play a part in sentencing. She contributed to the death of a person.
Edit: To be more clear, I am not criticizing her personal thoughts or prayers; they are none of my business. I am critical of her public actions and statements.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
That makes a lot of sense...and while I don't personally agree in this case I much more sympathize with your position as it appears that the state/police handled the execution and trial extremely poorly.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Do you realize that the state/police often handle these things poorly? Did you check out the link I included above?
Former Governor Ryan will have to answer for some awful things on earth and in heaven, but to his credit, he did stop executions in Illinois.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
I glanced, but I can accept the idea that it is relatively common. But I'm for sweeping legal reforms and against the death penalty (thank you Hatrack) in general so...
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Rakeesh: I find myself loosing my calm trying to deal with your continual character assassination... Stay on topic! (Hint, the topic is not Stone_Wolf_) Take a hint from Boots, she manages to disagree with me without getting dragged into these little melodramas.
I can see why you hate rolleyes so much. You must inspire them constantly.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Also diminishing the case for this being about justice is the possibility that the actual murderer of Officer McPhail is unpunished. With the execution of Troy Davis we no longer are motivated to investigate, this is more likely to remain the case. If this were really about justice, no stone would go unturned, no doubt unexamined in searching for the truth.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Parkour:
Boots: I don't think what happened to Davis -is- justice...which is a separate and different issue then the victim's mother's prayers for justice. Her efforts to get him executed likely did not serve her true purpose of getting justice for her son, which is tragic (especially for Davis) but also for her as well.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Prayed for justice, but the thing she was praying for wasn't actually justice.
Hm.
Isn't there a word for that sort of thing, aside from the seamless consistency of praying for someone to be executed, and then praying for comfort for his family?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
]. I am alive today, honestly, by sheer luck. (Please note, just to be clear I am VERY VERY grateful and happy to be alive.) I felt extreme survivor guilt, and wondered very seriously about my state with God. According to my religious beliefs at that time, I considered suicide akin to murder. My thoughts went something like, "Other people have done exactly the same ACTIONS as I did, but those other people died. So how is it that they are self-murderers, but I am not? We did the same thing with the same intention, so, in God's eyes, how can we not be the same?" I believed for some time that to God I WAS the same and considered myself a self-murderer. That was a very hard time for me. [Note: since then I have changed and learned a lot, and I in no way believe anything remotely like that now.]![[Wink]](wink.gif)