Examining Georgia’s History of Racial Violence and Capital Punishment


by Taylor Bonner

Posted on Aug 27, 2026

Historical Foundations: Racist Roots Top

To under­stand the mod­ern use of the death penal­ty in Georgia, it is nec­es­sary to begin with its his­tor­i­cal foun­da­tions. Capital pun­ish­ment in the United States has long been applied uneven­ly across racial groups, and Georgia’s his­to­ry reflects this broader pattern. 

The Equal Justice Initiative iden­ti­fies Georgia as one of twelve states with the high­est num­ber of doc­u­ment­ed lynch­ings in the United States. These acts of racial ter­ror are not sep­a­rate from for­mal sys­tems of pun­ish­ment; lynch­ing and legal exe­cu­tions were used simul­ta­ne­ous­ly and were often mutu­al­ly rein­forc­ing. This fact pro­vides impor­tant con­text for under­stand­ing how the death penal­ty has been and is cur­rent­ly used in the state. 

Between the years 1877 – 1950, at least 599 peo­ple were lynched in Georgia.1And between the years 1890 and 1900 there was an aver­age of more than one mob exe­cu­tion per month in Georgia.2Mob exe­cu­tions in Georgia near­ly exclu­sive­ly tar­get­ed Black peo­ple, who com­prised 95% of vic­tims. Almost none of the mob par­tic­i­pants faced any legal con­se­quences. According to news­pa­per accounts from the late 19th cen­tu­ry through the mid 20th cen­tu­ry, the two most com­mon jus­ti­fi­ca­tions for mob exe­cu­tions were for the alleged mur­der of a white per­son and the alleged rape of a white woman. 

Sam Hose (a.k.a. Sam Holt) is one of many Black peo­ple who was lynched by a mob in Georgia. On April 23, 1899 in Coweta County, while he was sit­ting in jail for being accused of killing a white man, a lynch mob broke into Mr. Hose’s cell, trans­port­ed him off-site, muti­lat­ed his body with knife cuts”, then doused him in oil and set him on fire” in front of near­ly 2,000 spec­ta­tors. After the exe­cu­tion, it is report­ed that spec­ta­tors col­lect­ed pieces of [Mr. Hose’s] bone and bits of flesh” as souvenirs. 

Race-based data is close­ly con­nect­ed to mod­ern day cap­i­tal sen­tenc­ing pat­terns; sev­er­al stud­ies doc­u­ment how the race of vic­tims affects whether and how often Black cap­i­tal defen­dants are sen­tenced to death. Research from 2024 dis­cov­ered that in 92%3 of all Georgia death eli­gi­ble cas­es with­out a white female vic­tim, a death sen­tence was nev­er even sought. 

On August 16, 1924, the Georgia General Assembly passed a law that end­ed death by hang­ing for all peo­ple con­vict­ed of a cap­i­tal crime and replaced the method of exe­cu­tion with elec­tro­cu­tion. The first elec­tro­cu­tion occurred on September 13, 1924 at Georgia State Prison in Milledgeville, Georgia with the exe­cu­tion of Howard Hinton — a Black man in his ear­ly 20s, who was exe­cut­ed for the alleged assault of a white woman in Dekalb County. 

Landmark Legislation Top

Furman v. Georgia is one of the most mon­u­men­tal cas­es in American legal his­to­ry and inval­i­dat­ed every state death penal­ty statute across the nation. The 1972 deci­sion also spared the lives of 629 indi­vid­u­als who had been sen­tenced to death. 

The deci­sion con­sol­i­dat­ed three cas­es, Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia, and Branch v. Texas. The lead peti­tion­er, William Henry Furman, at just 24-years old, was sen­tenced to death for the mur­der of William Mickie. A host of mit­i­gat­ing fac­tors told Mr. Furman’s sto­ry: he was a Black man who was poor, had a men­tal ill­ness, a phys­i­cal dis­abil­i­ty, an intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty, a sixth-grade edu­ca­tion, epilep­sy-induced psy­chosis, and suf­fered from alco­holism. His death sen­tence was imposed by a jury com­prised of 11 white peo­ple and 1 Black per­son dur­ing a time when Black peo­ple were rou­tine­ly exclud­ed from jury ser­vice. Mr. Furman was denied his Sixth Amendment right to be tried by a jury drawn from a rep­re­sen­ta­tive cross sec­tion of the community.” 

Ultimately, Mr. Furman, Mr. Jackson, and Mr. Branch — all Black men — urged the United States Supreme Court to con­sid­er whether their death sen­tences con­sti­tut­ed cru­el and unusu­al pun­ish­ment in vio­la­tion of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Successfully lit­i­gat­ed by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF), the Furman deci­sion held by a 5 to 4 vote that the admin­is­tra­tion of the death penal­ty was so arbi­trary that it was uncon­sti­tu­tion­al as applied.”  Justice William O. Douglas in his con­cur­ring opin­ion for the majority stated: 

It would seem to be incon­testable that the death penal­ty inflict­ed on one defen­dant is unusu­al’ if it dis­crim­i­nates against him by rea­son of his race, reli­gion, wealth, social posi­tion, or class, or if it is imposed under a pro­ce­dure that gives room for the play of such prejudices.” 

Gregg v. Georgia 

Just four years after Furman, the Court’s deci­sion in Gregg v. Georgia (1976) sig­naled the begin­ning of the mod­ern era of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. Defendant Troy Leon Gregg was sen­tenced to death under a new death penal­ty statute for rob­bing and mur­der­ing two men in Gwinnett County, Georgia. During the penal­ty phase, the jury was instruct­ed that it could con­sid­er either life impris­on­ment or a death sen­tence on each count by con­sid­er­ing mit­i­gat­ing and aggra­vat­ing fac­tors.4 The jury could not con­sid­er an impo­si­tion of death sen­tence unless it found beyond a rea­son­able doubt” one of three rel­e­vant statu­to­ry aggra­vat­ing cir­cum­stances. The Supreme Court was asked to decide whether the process Georgia used to impose a death sen­tence vio­lat­ed the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. In a 7 – 2 deci­sion, the Court held that it did not. It held that a death sen­tence is not invari­ably dis­pro­por­tion­ate where a life has been tak­en delib­er­ate­ly by the offend­er,” char­ac­ter­iz­ing cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment as an extreme sanc­tion, suit­able to the most extreme of crimes.” Justice Potter Stewart wrote a concurrence declaring: 

But we are con­cerned here only with the impo­si­tion of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment for the crime of mur­der, and, when a life has been tak­en delib­er­ate­ly by the offend­er, we can­not say that the pun­ish­ment is invari­ably dis­pro­por­tion­ate to the crime. It is an extreme sanc­tion, suit­able to the most extreme of crimes. We hold that the death penal­ty is not a form of pun­ish­ment that may nev­er be imposed, regard­less of the cir­cum­stances of the offense, regard­less of the char­ac­ter of the offend­er, and regard­less of the pro­ce­dure fol­lowed in reach­ing the deci­sion to impose it.” 

Thirty-four years after Gregg, in an October 2010 inter­view on National Public Radio, then new­­ly-retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who vot­ed with the plu­ral­i­ty to rein­state the death penal­ty in Gregg, admit­ted he par­tic­u­lar­ly regret­ted his vote:  

I thought at the time … that if the uni­verse of defen­dants eli­gi­ble for the death penal­ty is suf­fi­cient­ly nar­row so that you can be con­fi­dent that the defen­dant real­ly mer­its that severe pun­ish­ment, that the death penal­ty was appro­pri­ate…over the years, the Court con­stant­ly expand­ed the cas­es eli­gi­ble for the death penal­ty, so that the under­ly­ing premise for my vote has dis­ap­peared, in a sense.”

Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens

John Paul Stevens

Justice Stevens also made note of the com­plex­i­ties in death penalty statues.

I real­ly think that the death penal­ty today is vast­ly dif­fer­ent from the death penal­ty that we thought we were authorizing.” 

Near the time of pub­li­ca­tion of this report, the legal and death penal­ty com­mu­ni­ties marked the 50th anniver­sary of the Gregg deci­sion. Since its impo­si­tion, near­ly 200 Black peo­ple in Georgia have been sen­tenced to death. 

Seal Georgia Supreme Court

McCleskey v Kemp (1987): The Dred Scott of our Time” 

The McCleskey case made a con­vinc­ing argu­ment about the racial bias in the death penal­ty by pre­sent­ing a ground­break­ing empir­i­cal study from University of Iowa law pro­fes­sor David C. Baldus and his col­leagues Charles Pulaski and George Woodworth, show­ing that race influ­ences who is sen­tenced to die in Georgia. 

The defen­dant, Warren McCleskey, a Black man, was sen­tenced to death in Fulton County for the killing of a white police offi­cer. Mr. McCleskey and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund chal­lenged his sen­tence on the grounds that it was racial­ly biased and vio­lat­ed his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. He pre­sent­ed sev­er­al data points from the Baldus study that ana­lyzed 230 dif­fer­ent fac­tors that can be part of a state’s deci­sion to seek death. 

In a 5 – 4 deci­sion, the United States Supreme Court ruled against Mr. McCleskey. The Baldus study, it held, fail[ed] to con­tribute any­thing of val­ue” to McCleskey’s claim, “[the] sta­tis­tics do not demon­strate a pri­ma facie case in sup­port of the con­tention that the death penal­ty was imposed upon him because of his race, because of the race of the vic­tim, or because of any Eighth Amendment con­cern,” and “[the data is] insuf­fi­cient to demon­strate dis­crim­i­na­to­ry intent or uncon­sti­tu­tion­al dis­crim­i­na­tion in the Fourteenth Amendment con­text, [and] insuf­fi­cient to show irra­tional­i­ty, arbi­trari­ness and capri­cious­ness under any kind of Eighth Amendment analy­sis.” In its opin­ion, the Court acknowl­edged the sta­tis­tics as proof of dis­crim­i­na­to­ry intent in cas­es chal­leng­ing juror selec­tion or Batson cas­es, but said that “…the nature of the cap­i­tal sen­tenc­ing deci­sion, and the rela­tion­ship of the sta­tis­tics to that deci­sion, are fun­da­men­tal­ly dif­fer­ent from the cor­re­spond­ing ele­ments in the venire selec­tion or Title VII cas­es.” Justice Lewis F. Powell, who wrote the major­i­ty opin­ion, lat­er con­fessed to his biog­ra­ph­er that he regret­ted his McCleskey vote. When asked whether he would change his vote in any case he respond­ed with the following: 

Yes, McCleskey v. Kemp.” 

Do you mean you would now accept the argu­ment from sta­tis­tics?” 

No, I would vote the oth­er way in any cap­i­tal case.” 

In any cap­i­tal case?” 

Yes.” 

Even in Furman v. Georgia?”  

Yes. I have come to think that cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment should be abol­ished.” 

Mr. McCleskey was exe­cut­ed on September 25th, 1991. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) notes the McCleskey deci­sion “…has been round­ly con­demned as a low point’ in the quest for equal­i­ty, com­pa­ra­ble to Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) — which held that peo­ple of African ances­try were not enti­tled to the pro­tec­tions of the Constitution — and Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) — which upheld racial seg­re­ga­tion of public facilities.” 

During a DPI pod­cast with Professor and Co-direc­tor of the Center for Criminal Justice, Alexis Hoag-Fordjour of Brooklyn Law School, Professor Hoag-Fordjour reflect­ed on the lega­cy of the McCleskey deci­sion at its 35th anniversary.

And again, it’s Black defen­dants charged, con­vict­ed with mur­der­ing white vic­tims, [who are] those that through­out that entire process are the least like­ly to have obtained post-con­vic­tion relief, the least like­ly to [obtain] clemen­cy, you know, maybe from a gov­er­nor at that sort of 11th hour stage of deci­sion mak­ing and are ulti­mate­ly actu­al­ly exe­cut­ed. So if any­thing, the evi­dence that David Baldus brought on behalf of Mr. McCleskey has just become even stronger in the sub­se­quent 35 years.” 

Professor Alexis Hoag-Fordjour

Hoag fordjour alexis headshot 2

After strug­gling with the issue of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment for more than 20 years, Justice Harry Blackmun — who dis­sent­ed in McCleskey v. Kemp and Furman v. Georgia but joined the major­i­ty in Gregg v. Georgia—ulti­mate­ly con­clud­ed that the death penal­ty exper­i­ment has failed.” According to a 1994 New York Times arti­cle, Justice Blackmun lat­er acknowl­edged that race con­tributes to the inher­ent arbi­trari­ness of the death penal­ty, a posi­tion that con­trast­ed with the hold­ing in McCleskey. Justice Blackmun expressed his final view on capital punishment: 

It seems that the deci­sion whether a human being should live or die is so inher­ent­ly sub­jec­tive — rife with all of life’s under­stand­ing, expe­ri­ences, prej­u­dices, and pas­sions — that it inevitably defies the ratio­nal­i­ty and con­sis­ten­cy required by the Constitution. [It is time] to admit the futil­i­ty of the effort to har­mo­nize these two irrec­on­cil­able con­sti­tu­tion­al com­mands. This means accept­ing the fact that the death penal­ty can­not be admin­is­tered in accord with our Constitution.” 

Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun

Blackmun 1

Juror Bias Top

Juror bias is a per­sis­tent and dam­ag­ing flaw in America’s death penal­ty sys­tem. For cen­turies, cap­i­tal defen­dants of col­or have been — and remain — vul­ner­a­ble to con­vic­tions and death sen­tences imposed by juries that do not rep­re­sent a fair cross sec­tion of their com­mu­ni­ties. Too often these juries are not racial­ly diverse because of the delib­er­ate mis­con­duct of prosecutors. 

Keith Leroy Tharpe 

In April 2019, Keith Leroy Tharpe appealed to the Supreme Court to con­sid­er the appeal of his death sen­tence based on evi­dence of racial bias. Mr. Tharpe, a Black man, received his death sen­tence in 1990. While prepar­ing his appeal, Mr. Tharpe’s lawyers inter­viewed jurors from his case, and one white juror made the fol­low­ing state­ment in his affidavit: 

I have observed there are two types of Black peo­ple: 1. Black folks and 2. N*****s. 

For exam­ple, some of them who hang around our lit­tle store act up and car­ry on. I tell them, n****r, you bet­ter straight­en up or get out of here fast.’ I felt Tharpe who wasn’t in the good’ [B]lack folks cat­e­go­ry in my book, should get the elec­tric chair for what he did… 

After study­ing the Bible, I have won­dered if [B]lack peo­ple even have souls. Integration start­ed in Genesis. I think they are wrong. For exam­ple, look at O.J. Simpson. That white woman wouldn’t have been killed if she hadn’t mar­ried that [B]lack man.” 

Mr. Tharpe’s lawyers argued that the trou­bling racial bias demon­strat­ed by this juror should result in a new tri­al. And the ACLU com­ments that pros­e­cu­tor Joseph Briley, and the attor­ney gen­er­al “…should have respond­ed to the juror’s affi­davit by announc­ing they would not tol­er­ate racial bias in cap­i­tal sen­tenc­ing and agree that Tharpe should get a new tri­al.” But instead the pros­e­cu­tor and attor­ney gen­er­al obtained a new state­ment from the juror and argued that the racial bias of the juror should be irrel­e­vant to Mr. Tharpe’s death sen­tence because the law should not per­mit inves­ti­ga­tion into racial bias by jurors after the ver­dict. This response is par­tic­u­lar­ly notable giv­en Joseph Briley’s doc­u­ment­ed his­to­ry of alle­ga­tions involv­ing racial­ly biased pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al prac­tices in other cases. 

Although the U.S. Supreme Court denied cer­tio­rari for Mr. Tharpe, Justice Sonya Sotomayor dis­sent­ed from this deci­sion, not­ing the role that race played in his sentencing: 

These racist sen­ti­ments, expressed by a juror entrust­ed with a vote over Tharpe’s fate, sug­gest an appalling risk that racial bias swayed Tharpe’s sen­tenc­ing. The dan­ger of race deter­min­ing any crim­i­nal pun­ish­ment is intol­er­a­ble and endan­gers pub­lic con­fi­dence in the law.” 

Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor

Sotomayor

Mr. Tharpe died on death row in January 2020 at the age of 61

Johnny Lee Gates

Jury notes from Mr. Gates’ trial

Johnny Lee Gates spent 43 years incar­cer­at­ed, includ­ing 26 years on death row, for a crime he has always main­tained he did not com­mit. His attor­neys say detec­tives coerced his con­fes­sion, exploit­ed his intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty, and pros­e­cu­tors with­held key evi­dence from the defense. These delib­er­ate actions under­mined the legit­i­ma­cy of his con­vic­tion, and in 1991, Mr. Gates was sen­tenced to death by an all-white jury in Muscogee County, Georgia — sit­u­at­ed in a judi­cial area once known as the buck­le of the death belt.” This area pur­sued cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment more aggres­sive­ly than any oth­er juris­dic­tion in Georgia, and has a demon­strat­ed his­to­ry of reg­u­lar­ly empan­el­ing all-white juries and ille­gal­ly exclud­ing Black jurors. According to the Georgia Innocence Project, Muscogee County pros­e­cut­ing attor­ney Douglas Pullen exclud­ed 27 out of 27 qual­i­fied Black jurors in five death penal­ty cas­es against Black defen­dants in the late 1970s. In his appeal process, Mr. Gates’ lawyers dis­cov­ered jury selec­tion notes from the pros­e­cu­tors which showed that they had tracked the race of jurors, exclud­ed most Black jurors, and repeat­ed­ly wrote deroga­to­ry com­ments about Black peo­ple and Black prospec­tive jurors, whom they described as slow,” old +igno­rant,” cocky,” con artist,” hos­tile,” and fat.” White jurors were marked only with the let­ter W,” while Black jurors had an addi­tion­al nota­tion of N.” A Georgia Tech math­e­mat­ics pro­fes­sor pro­vid­ed expert tes­ti­mo­ny that the prob­a­bil­i­ty that Black jurors had been removed for race-neu­­tral rea­sons was infin­i­tes­i­mal­ly small at 0.000000000000000000000000000004%. Moreover, pros­e­cu­tors rat­ed jurors on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most favored — every Black juror was ranked a 1.” The only white juror ranked a 1” had said he was opposed to the death penalty. 

Mr. Gates’ death sen­tence was vacat­ed in 2003 not because of the ille­gal racial dis­crim­i­na­tion by pros­e­cu­tors, but on evi­dence of his intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty. The Georgia Supreme Court then vacat­ed Mr. Gates’ con­vic­tion based on excul­pa­to­ry DNA evidence. 

Mr. Gates walked free on May 152020

Given these pat­terns and nar­ra­tives of sys­temic exclu­sion, research on jury delib­er­a­tions pro­vides con­text for exam­in­ing pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al jury selec­tion prac­tices and the preva­lence of major­i­ty-white or all-white juries in cap­i­tal cas­es. A study of 340 cap­i­tal tri­als, includ­ing Georgia tri­als, found that when white jurors  out­num­ber Black jurors on a tri­al jury, there is a greater like­li­hood that a Black defen­dant will be sen­tenced to death. This was par­tic­u­lar­ly true in cas­es with white victims. 

Research shows that, among white peo­ple, sup­port for the death penal­ty is high­ly cor­re­lat­ed with anti-Black racial prej­u­dice. Having at least one Black man on a jury reduces the like­li­hood of a death sen­tence in cas­es with Black defen­dants and white vic­tims by almost 30%. 

Human Impact Top

Lena Baker

On August 14, 1945, Lena Baker, a Black woman, was sen­tenced to death for the mur­der of her white male employ­er, though records indi­cate she act­ed in self-defense. Her tri­al last­ed only four hours, and the jury was com­posed entire­ly of white men. In August 2005, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles issued a for­mal par­don for Ms. Baker — the first and only woman exe­cut­ed in Georgia in the elec­tric chair. The doc­u­ment was signed by all five board mem­bers, and a res­o­lu­tion was issued acknowl­edg­ing Ms. Baker’s life and the harm caused by her wrong­ful con­vic­tion. The par­don stat­ed that the board’s 1945 deci­sion to deny Ms. Baker clemen­cy was a griev­ous error, as this case called out for mercy.” 

Timothy Foster 

On the 13th anniver­sary of Batson v. Kentucky (1986) —the land­mark case that held that exclud­ing poten­tial jurors based on their race was uncon­sti­tu­tion­al under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment —Timothy Foster’s con­vic­tion and death sen­tence were over­turned by the U.S. Supreme Court after over­whelm­ing evi­dence showed that Black prospec­tive jurors had been ille­gal­ly exclud­ed at his Georgia tri­al. Evidence that a prosecutor’s rea­sons for strik­ing a black prospec­tive juror apply equal­ly to an oth­er­wise sim­i­lar non­black prospec­tive juror who is allowed to serve tends to sug­gest pur­pose­ful dis­crim­i­na­tion.” After a 35-year legal bat­tle, Mr. Foster, a Black man, was resen­tenced to life in prison with­out the pos­si­bil­i­ty of parole. 

Sample of notes reflect­ing that the pros­e­cu­tion marked the name of each Black prospec­tive juror in green high­lighter on four dif­fer­ent copies of the jury list; cir­cled the word BLACK” next to the Race” ques­tion on the juror ques­tion­naires of five Black prospec­tive jurors; iden­ti­fied three black prospec­tive jurors as B#1,” B#2,” and B#3”; and ranked the Black prospec­tive jurors against each oth­er in case it comes down to hav­ing to pick one of the [B]lack jurors.” Prosecutors claimed they struck each of the Black jurors for race-neu­tral rea­sons and did not use the high­light­ed list in their final deci­sion. 

Troy Davis: A catastrophic failure of the justice system.” 

Troy Anthony Davis, a Black man, was sen­tenced to death in 1991 for the mur­der of a white off-duty police offi­cer in Savannah, Georgia. The case against him con­sist­ed entire­ly of eye­wit­ness tes­ti­mo­ny. A 2025 report from the America Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) finds eye­wit­ness misiden­ti­fi­ca­tions have con­tributed to more than one-fifth of wrong­ful death penal­ty con­vic­tions, account­ing for 42 inno­cent peo­ple wrong­ful­ly con­vict­ed and sen­tenced to death. The ACLU also high­lights the role of race in wrong­ful death penal­ty con­vic­tions, not­ing that eye­wit­ness misiden­ti­fi­ca­tion is more like­ly to occur in cas­es involv­ing cross-racial iden­ti­fi­ca­tion. Research has con­sis­tent­ly iden­ti­fied cross racial iden­ti­fi­ca­tion as one of the old­est and most reli­able find­ings in eye­wit­ness misiden­ti­fi­ca­tion stud­ies, demon­strat­ing that white peo­ple are much more like­ly to misiden­ti­fy Black indi­vid­u­als than to mis­tak­en­ly iden­ti­fy mem­bers of their own race. This increased risk of cross-racial misiden­ti­fi­ca­tion has con­tributed to wrong­ful con­vic­tions in cap­i­tal cas­es, fur­ther illus­trat­ing the racial dis­par­i­ties embed­ded with­in the admin­is­tra­tion of the death penalty. 

Mr. Davis relent­less­ly main­tained his inno­cence amid evi­dence of racial bias and a deeply flawed investigation. 

No phys­i­cal evi­dence con­nect­ed Mr. Davis to the crime. And 7 of the 9 wit­ness­es who tes­ti­fied for the pros­e­cu­tion at Mr. Davis’ tri­al recant­ed and claimed that they were coerced to lie by the police. One of the wit­ness­es tes­ti­fied that he had seen the killing and that anoth­er man, Sylvester Cole, was the actu­al shoot­er; anoth­er wit­ness heard Mr. Cole con­fess to the crime but was barred from tes­ti­fy­ing about what they heard; anoth­er tes­ti­fied that she had heard Mr. Cole con­fess three times to the killing and was using Mr. Davis as his scape­goat. According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, one juror expressed, that she feels empa­thet­i­cal­ly” “…that Mr. Davis can­not be exe­cut­ed under these circumstances.” 

In 2011, The New York Times pub­lished an opin­ion arti­cle describ­ing Mr. Davis’ case as a grievous wrong.” 

Barry Scheck, co-founder and spe­cial coun­sel at the Innocence Project at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, notes that “[I]n Georgia, the recant­i­ng wit­ness­es don’t get to tes­ti­fy because the state’s courts have cre­at­ed an extra­or­di­nary Catch-22 rule — the purest fab­ri­ca­tion’ doc­trine – that arbi­trar­i­ly denies evi­den­tiary hear­ings even when extreme­ly per­sua­sive recan­ta­tion affi­davits have been submitted.” 

Mr. Davis’ case gar­nered world­wide atten­tion; with pleas for clemen­cy from renowned peo­ple across sociopo­lit­i­cal lines such as: for­mer President Jimmy Carter, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Pope Benedict XVI, the European Union, the European Parliament, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, for­mer FBI Director William Sessions, 51 for­mer and cur­rent mem­bers of U.S. Congress, for­mer Texas gov­er­nor Mark White, for­mer U.S. Senator Carol Moseley Braun and Civil Rights Activist and for­mer U.S. Representative John Lewis. Additionally, more than 630,000 let­ters were deliv­ered to the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles plead­ing for a stay of exe­cu­tion, includ­ing a let­ter signed by 110 mur­der vic­tim fam­i­ly mem­bers – deliv­ered by the son of a mur­dered police offi­cer in Atlanta. 

After 4 exe­cu­tion dates, police mis­con­duct, sev­er­al failed appeals, seri­ous doubts of his guilt, and 22 years on death row, Mr. Davis was exe­cut­ed by the state of Georgia on September 21, 2011. He left this final mes­sage to his advo­cates and supporters. 

…this Movement to end the death penal­ty, to seek true jus­tice, to expose a sys­tem that fails to pro­tect the Innocent must be accel­er­at­ed. There are so many more Troy Davis’. This fight to end the death penal­ty is not won or lost through me but through our strength to move for­ward and save every inno­cent per­son in cap­tiv­i­ty around the globe. We need to dis­man­tle this Unjust sys­tem city by city, state by state and coun­try by coun­try. I can’t wait to Stand with you, no mat­ter if that is in phys­i­cal or spir­i­tu­al form, I will one day be announc­ing, AM TROY DAVIS, and I AM FREE! Never Stop Fighting for Justice and We will Win !” 

Troy Davis

Troy Davis GA

The day after Mr. Davis’ exe­cu­tion, thou­sands gath­ered in New York City for a Day of Outrage” to denounce the per­ceived fail­ures of the jus­tice sys­tem.” Lee Wengraf, a writer and activist com­ment­ed on the protest: 

The strug­gle for Troy Davis has not just struck a chord, it has tak­en the lid off of the out­rage that peo­ple feel about the depths of racism that sur­rounds the death penal­ty, the prison sys­tem, all the crim­i­nal jus­tice, police bru­tal­i­ty. And I think it’s that kind of ener­gy and out­rage that has kept Troy Davis, first of all, that kept him alive as long as it did and brought us so close to poten­tial­ly win­ning this, that Troy Davis was some­one that the whole world was watch­ing over these past few days, and because of the way that peo­ple raised their voic­es and shout­ed out and said this must not stand, this is a legal lynch­ing.” 

Since the year Troy Davis entered death row, DPI has iden­ti­fied near­ly 100 defen­dants of col­or who have been released from death row across the United States based on inno­cence claims. 

By the Numbers Top

Homicides with white vic­tims are 7.49x more like­ly to result in the defen­dant being sen­tenced to death than homi­cides with Black vic­tims. 5

In Georgia, among defen­dants sen­tenced to death in the mod­ern era, near­ly 64% of Black defen­dants were sen­tenced in cas­es involv­ing at least one White vic­tim, while only 3% of White defen­dants were sen­tenced in cas­es involv­ing at least one Black vic­tim. 

Georgia’s Capital Punishment Procedures Under ABA Scrutiny Top

In January 2006 the American Bar Association Death Penalty Moratorium Implementation Project released Evaluating Fairness and Accuracy in State Death Penalty Systems: The Georgia Death Penalty Assessment Report which iden­ti­fied how Georgia’s cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment sys­tem fell short in fair­ness and accu­ra­cy. The Assessment Team iden­ti­fied 7 major prob­lems in Georgia’s cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment sys­tem includ­ing racial dis­par­i­ties in sentencing: 

Both the race of the defen­dant and the race of the vic­tim pre­dict who is sen­tenced to death in the State of Georgia, with white sus­pects and those who kill white vic­tims more like­ly to be sen­tenced to death than black sus­pects and those who kill black vic­tims. The data show that among all homi­cides with known sus­pects, those sus­pect­ed of killing whites are 4.56 times as like­ly to be sen­tenced to death as those who are sus­pect­ed of killing blacks.’ Based on this data, race clear­ly mat­ters in cap­i­tal sen­tenc­ing in Georgia. 

The Assessment Team estab­lished that “…the State can­not ensure that fair­ness and accu­ra­cy are the hall­mark of every case in which the death penal­ty is sought or imposed.” And there­fore, all but one team mem­ber sug­gests that the State impose a mora­to­ri­um on both cap­i­tal pros­e­cu­tions and exe­cu­tions until the State can address the prob­lems iden­ti­fied in their report. 

Georgia issued a brief mora­to­ri­um on exe­cu­tions dur­ing the Covid-19 pan­dem­ic in March 2020, agree­ing not to pur­sue cer­tain exe­cu­tion war­rants until a vac­ci­na­tion against Covid is read­i­ly avail­able to all mem­bers of the pub­lic.” Then after more than 4 years with­out an exe­cu­tion, the state exe­cut­ed Willie James Pye, a Black man, on March 20, 2024 at age 59. Mr. Pye pre­vi­ous­ly had his death sen­tence reversed due to his attorney’s inef­fec­tive rep­re­sen­ta­tion and racial bias. 

Regarding racial dis­par­i­ties, the Assessment Team made spe­cif­ic rec­om­men­da­tions that urged Georgia to implement: 

  • Jurisdictions should ful­ly inves­ti­gate and eval­u­ate the impact of racial dis­crim­i­na­tion in their crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tems and devel­op strate­gies that strive to eliminate it. 
  • Jurisdictions should col­lect and review all valid stud­ies already under­tak­en to deter­mine the impact of racial dis­crim­i­na­tion on the admin­is­tra­tion of the death penal­ty and should iden­ti­fy and car­ry out any addi­tion­al stud­ies that would help deter­mine dis­crim­i­na­to­ry impacts on cap­i­tal cas­es. In con­duct­ing new stud­ies, states should col­lect data by race for any aspect of the death penal­ty in which race could be a factor. 
  • Jurisdictions should adopt leg­is­la­tion explic­it­ly stat­ing that no per­son shall be put to death in accor­dance with a sen­tence sought or imposed as a result of the race of the defen­dant or the race of the vic­tim. To enforce such a law, juris­dic­tions should per­mit defen­dants and inmates to estab­lish pri­ma facie cas­es of dis­crim­i­na­tion based upon proof that their cas­es are part of estab­lished racial­ly dis­crim­i­na­to­ry pat­terns. If such a pri­ma facie case is estab­lished, the State should have the bur­den of rebut­ting it by sub­stan­tial evidence. 
  • Jurisdictions should devel­op and imple­ment edu­ca­tion­al pro­grams applic­a­ble to all parts of the crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem to stress that race should not be a fac­tor in any aspect of death penal­ty admin­is­tra­tion. To ensure that such pro­grams are effec­tive, juris­dic­tions also should impose mean­ing­ful sanc­tions against any State actor found to have act­ed on the basis of race in a capital case. 
  • Jurisdictions should require jury instruc­tions that it is improp­er to con­sid­er any racial fac­tors in their deci­sion mak­ing and that they should report any evi­dence of racial dis­crim­i­na­tion in jury deliberations. 
  • Defense coun­sel should be trained to iden­ti­fy and devel­op racial dis­crim­i­na­tion claims in cap­i­tal cas­es. Jurisdictions also should ensure that defense coun­sel are trained to iden­ti­fy biased jurors dur­ing voir dire

Even though some have the option to imple­ment the rec­om­men­da­tions in the state, they are not required, leav­ing a sig­nif­i­cant gap in fair­ness and accu­ra­cy. Since the report’s release, there has been no mean­ing­ful imple­men­ta­tion of the Assessment Team’s rec­om­men­da­tions. The only reform is the pas­sage of HB123 in 2025, that strength­ens pro­tec­tions for death penal­ty defen­dants with intellectual disability. 

Vanessa Griddine-Jones, Executive Director of the Georgians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty pro­vides per­spec­tive on the impact of race on Georgia’s capital punishment: 

Georgia’s death penal­ty car­ries a long, unde­ni­able his­to­ry of racial dis­par­i­ty: a white victim’s death is more like­ly to result in a death sen­tence than a Black victim’s. That dis­par­i­ty has been exposed, doc­u­ment­ed, and still allowed to stand. A pun­ish­ment this final can­not be trust­ed to a sys­tem where race weighs on the out­come at all.” 

Vanessa Griddine-Jones

IMG 2585 jpeg

Sources

Scott Phillips, Justin F. Marceau, Sam Kamin, and Nicole King, Sacred Victims: Fifty Years of Data on Victim Race and Sex as Predictors of Execution, 114 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 249 (2024).

American Civil Liberties Union. Fatal Flaws: Revealing the Racial and Religious Gerrymandering of the Capital Jury.” ACLU, (24 June 2025).

Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Death Penalty Cases: Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia, Branch v. Texas, 408 U.S. 238 (1972), 63 J. Crim. L. Criminology & Police Sci. 484 (1972)

Footnotes
  1. Data from Equal Justice Initative 

  2. Data from Stewart E. Tolnay, University of Washington, Seattle and E. M. Beck, University of Georgia

  3. 2,202 Georgia cap­i­tal cases analyzed 

  4. The jury is not required to find any mit­i­gat­ing cir­cum­stance to make a rec­om­men­da­tion of mer­cy, but it must find a statu­to­ry aggra­vat­ing cir­cum­stance before rec­om­mend­ing a sen­tence of death. 

  5. Data from 2016 CDC Homicide data reporting