ATLANTA, Georgia, Oct 26, 2011 (IPS) - "Innocence matters" is one of the slogans used by activists opposing the U.S. state of Georgia's execution of Troy Davis, up until the day the sentence was carried out by lethal injection on Sep. 21.
It seems like stating the obvious that innocence matters in the criminal justice system, especially when someone's life is on the line in a death penalty case. At least, innocence should always matter. But does it in practice?
Davis was convicted of killing police officer Mark MacPhail in 1989. Yet following his conviction, seven of nine witnesses against him recanted their testimony, two witnesses implicated another person as the killer, and two of the original jurors who found Davis guilty came forward to oppose the execution.
No forensic evidence presented at trial indicated that Davis was the shooter.
Martina Correia, Davis's sister, explained the significance of the phrase in a 2008 video interview with Black Agenda Report.
"The court system is telling us that recanted testimony is not as important as trial testimony. And what's happening is my brother, Troy, is being denied access to the courts because they're saying that innocence - if you got a fair trial in the beginning - it doesn't matter whether or not you're innocent or guilty, they don't have to hear new evidence.
As it turns out, there are a number of procedural obstacles which essentially prevented Davis's possible innocence from mattering when it came to saving his life.
Many of these obstacles are the direct result of legislation passed by the U.S. Congress in 1996 called the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA).
Source:
IPS, October 26, 2011
