A year and eight days ago, the Supreme Court took the unusual step of granting an “original writ,” and handed down a novel decision directing a federal court to revisit the murder conviction of Troy Anthony Davis by allowing Davis to put on evidence of actual innocence. (See our original post on the decision here.) Davis was convicted after trial of shooting a police officer to death in 1989. He always claimed he was there, but didn’t shoot anyone. Several witnesses said otherwise, and the jury found him guilty. After some of the witnesses recanted, however, and evidence was discovered that indicated that the prosecution’s star witness was the real shooter, the issue of actual innocence was put into play. With some serious debate among the Justices, the Supreme Court sent it back specifically for the district court to determine whether there was evidence not available at the trial would “clearly establish” his innocence.
Yesterday, the federal court finished hearing the evidence of actual innocence, and found nothing worth reversing the conviction. “Mr. Davis vastly overstates the value of his evidence of innocence,” the court found. “Some of the evidence is not credible and would be disregarded by a reasonable juror. … Other evidence that Mr. Davis brought forward is too general to provide anything more than smoke and mirrors.” You can read the CNN story here, and the decision itself here (part 1) and here (part 2).
“This court concludes that executing an innocent person would violate the Eighth Amendment (barring cruel and unusual punishment) of the U.S. Constitution,” ruled U.S. District Judge William T. Moore Jr. “However, Mr. Davis is not innocent.” Although the state’s case “may not be ironclad, most reasonable jurors would again vote to convict Mr. Davis of officer MacPhail’s murder.” Repeating a phrase, it went on “ultimately, while Mr. Davis’ new evidence casts some additional, minimal doubt on his conviction, it is largely smoke and mirrors,” Moore ruled. “The vast majority of the evidence at trial remains intact, and the new evidence is largely not credible or lacking in probative value.”
We’d be surprised if there wasn’t yet another appeal. We’ll save you our rant on why this process is precisely why capital punishment doesn’t work. If you’re interested, you can read it here.