William S. Sessions, the for­mer direc­tor of the FBI and a for­mer fed­er­al judge and pros­e­cu­tor, recent­ly wrote an op-ed call­ing for the com­mu­ta­tion of Troy Davis​’s death sen­tence to life in prison with­out parole. Writing in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Sessions said that ​“seri­ous ques­tions about Davis’ guilt, high­light­ed by wit­ness recan­ta­tions, alle­ga­tions of police coer­cion and a lack of rel­e­vant phys­i­cal evi­dence, con­tin­ue to plague his con­vic­tion.” He called upong the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles to exer­cise ​“a mea­sure of com­pas­sion and human­i­ty.” He con­clud­ed that there is too much doubt to allow an exe­cu­tion: ​“Without DNA or oth­er forms of phys­i­cal or sci­en­tif­ic evi­dence that can be objec­tive­ly mea­sured and test­ed, it is pos­si­ble that doubts about guilt in this case will nev­er be resolved. However, when it comes to the sen­tence of death, there should be no room for doubt.” Davis’s exe­cu­tion is sched­uled for September 21, and his clemen­cy hear­ing will be on September 19. Read full op-ed below.

September 15, 2011

Should Davis be exe­cut­ed?
No: Questions about his guilt con­tin­ue to plague his con­vic­tion.

By William S. Sessions

As Troy Davis faces his fourth exe­cu­tion date on Sept. 21, many may assume that lin­ger­ing doubts about the case have been resolved. This is far from true, and the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles — which has sev­er­al new mem­bers since the Davis case last crossed its desks — has the daunt­ing task of review­ing one of the most con­tro­ver­sial cas­es the state has ever seen.

What quick­ly will become appar­ent is that seri­ous ques­tions about Davis’ guilt, high­light­ed by wit­ness recan­ta­tions, alle­ga­tions of police coer­cion and a lack of rel­e­vant phys­i­cal evi­dence, con­tin­ue to plague his con­vic­tion. Last sum­mer, an extra­or­di­nary hear­ing ordered by the U.S. Supreme Court to answer these ques­tions instead left us with more doubt.

At Davis’ evi­den­tiary hear­ing, wit­ness­es called by Davis recant­ed tri­al tes­ti­mo­ny and made alle­ga­tions of police pres­sure. Others tes­ti­fied that an alter­na­tive sus­pect had con­fessed to them that he com­mit­ted the crime. One eye­wit­ness tes­ti­fied, for the first time, that he saw this oth­er sus­pect, a rel­a­tive of his, com­mit the crime. Police wit­ness­es for the state of Georgia alter­na­tive­ly assert­ed that the orig­i­nal tri­al tes­ti­mo­ny was the true ver­sion of events and that it was elicit­ed with­out coer­cion.

Some of these same wit­ness­es also had tes­ti­fied at Davis’ tri­al but have since recant­ed their tri­al tes­ti­mo­ny. The judge at the evi­den­tiary hear­ing found their recan­ta­tions to be unre­li­able and, there­fore, found Davis was unable to ​“clear­ly estab­lish” his inno­cence. The prob­lem is that the tes­ti­mo­ny of these same wit­ness­es, whom the judge had deter­mined were less believ­able, had been essen­tial to the orig­i­nal con­vic­tion and death sen­tence.

What the hear­ing demon­strat­ed most con­clu­sive­ly was that the evi­dence in this case — con­sist­ing almost entire­ly of con­flict­ing sto­ries, tes­ti­monies and state­ments — is inad­e­quate to the task of con­vinc­ing­ly estab­lish­ing either Davis’ guilt or his inno­cence. Without DNA or oth­er forms of phys­i­cal or sci­en­tif­ic evi­dence that can be objec­tive­ly mea­sured and test­ed, it is pos­si­ble that doubts about guilt in this case will nev­er be resolved.

However, when it comes to the sen­tence of death, there should be no room for doubt. I believe there is no more seri­ous crime than the mur­der of a law enforce­ment offi­cer who was putting his or her life on the line to pro­tect inno­cent bystanders. However, jus­tice is not done for Officer Mark Allen MacPhail Sr. if the wrong man is pun­ished.

In 2007, the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Paroles issued a stay of exe­cu­tion for Davis and took the admirable posi­tion that it would ​“not allow an exe­cu­tion to pro­ceed in this State unless and until its mem­bers are con­vinced that there is no doubt as to the guilt of the accused.”

Because this case con­tin­ues to be per­me­at­ed by doubt, the Board of Pardons and Paroles’ stance con­tin­ues to be the right one. In real­i­ty, there will always be cas­es, includ­ing cap­i­tal cas­es, in which doubts about guilt can­not be erased to an accept­able lev­el of cer­tain­ty. The Davis case is one of these, and it is for cas­es like this that exec­u­tive clemen­cy exists.

Those respon­si­ble for clemen­cy play a vital role in ensur­ing our legal sys­tem includes a mea­sure of com­pas­sion and human­i­ty. The death penal­ty should not be car­ried out, and Davis’ sen­tence should be com­mut­ed to life.

William S. Sessions is the for­mer direc­tor of the FBI, a for­mer fed­er­al judge and federal prosecutor.

(W. Sessions, ​“Should Davis be exe­cut­ed?,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, September 15, 2011). See New Voices and Innocence. See also, more infor­ma­tion on Troy Davis.

Tags
Citation Guide