The Individuals on Death Row

The execution of Troy Davis by lethal injection is a sad moment in the history of the American justice system; it taps into what is perhaps the strongest argument that can be deployed against capital punishment: what if the courts get it wrong? Davis was convicted twenty years ago on evidence that has looked increasingly dubious in the time since. Guilt must be ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. In Davis’s case, there was doubt. Lots of it. And it was reasonable. Since the conviction, seven of the nine witnesses have rescinded their statements, and jurors have admitted doubts about their verdict; there was no DNA evidence linking Davis to the murder, and no gun was found at the scene. One witness even claims to have heard another man (Sylvester Coles, a witness for the prosecution) admit to the crime. The family of Mark Allen MacPhail insist that Davis is guilty, but they cannot in any way be regarded as impartial. There is a reason that victims and their family members do not decide either on guilt or on the sentence of convicts: people want revenge, or closure, they think that a life for a life will make them feel better. Perhaps it will, but that is not how the criminal justice system works, thankfully.

So people are asking why, in the face of so much doubt, an appeal was not granted, even by the Supreme Court. Surely, if judges were so sure of his guilt, granting an appeal and demonstrating this more conclusively could only have served to vindicate the execution, if only in the eyes of those who support the death penalty. The judicial system has more to fear from Davis’s execution than it would have from another hearing: and if he had been found not-guilty, well then, the system would have done its job in righting a serious miscarriage of justice. Members of the African-American community are depicting this as a race issue: a black man was hastily convicted on now-questionable grounds for the murder of a white police officer; black witnesses were pressured into giving evidence against the suspect. Instead of tackling this criticism head on by allowing an appeal, and demonstrating that there is truth in the principle that all are equal before the law, the Supreme Court forced Davis and his family to endure another few hours of uncertainty whilst it debated whether or not to grant his lawyers’ request.

The death penalty is morally repugnant (that is the strongest phrase I can think of) because no one has the right to take the life of another human being: it is playing God, and I don’t even believe in God; or it is making the state the same cold-blooded murderer as the individual it kills. But sometimes I wonder, wouldn’t it be kinder just to kill them? Troy Davis’s execution was scheduled four times, and in 2008 it was stayed just 90 minutes before it was due to take place. On 20^th September Cleve Foster received a stay of execution hours before he was due to die, and this for the third time. Surely it is inhumane to put him through that stress again and again, to make him prepare himself for death only to tell him that he has a few more rounds of appeal to endure, days, months, years longer waiting for the final judgement, as much as it would be to actually kill him. Under international law mock executions are a form of torture; coming this close to the real thing is no different.

Troy Davis’s execution brings the question of continuing racial tensions in Georgia to light, it demonstrates the care that the courts absolutely must take in handing down sentences when capital punishment is involved, and it highlights the horror of last-hour reprieves. This case has touched so many people so deeply because they came to identify with Davis as an individual; all the men and women on death row, guilty or not-guilty, are individuals.