Troy Davis Continuing Updates: Supreme Court Denies Stay

Troy Davis is scheduled for execution at 7:00 pm ET. Here are some continuous updates:

10:20 pm: Supreme Court rejects stay. No dissenting opinions. The order reads simply:

The application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice Thomas and by him referred to the Court is denied.

9:00 ET: Georgia State Patrol now out in force at prison, triples in size. Video here. Amnesty Int'l says family is being prepared for news. Doesn't sound good. [More...]

7:30 pm: Georgia is delaying execution to await word from the Supreme Court on a stay. ABC calls it a reprieve but its really just a delay. As said below, the window is between today and Sept. 28. If Supreme Court denies stay, they could proceed at any time, including tonight.

7:00 ET: Via Jake Tapper: White House says Obama will have no comment. Here's the full statement:

“Dating back to his time in the Illinois State Senate, President Obama has worked to ensure accuracy and fairness in the criminal justice system – especially in capital punishment cases,” said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. “However, it is not appropriate for the President of the United States to weigh in on specific cases like this one, which is a state prosecution.”

6:59: Here is the state's response in Supreme Court.

Petitioner waited until the morning of his scheduled execution to file a successive state habeas petition. He now comes to this Court one hour before his scheduled execution asking this Court to enter an open-ended stay to allow him to potentially file a petition for writ of certiorari with this Court. The state court has reviewed Petitioner’s claims, which present no new evidence or argument, and denied them instanter. The claims were denied on independent and adequate state law grounds, presenting nothing for this Court’s certiorari review.

6:30 pm: Georgia Supreme Court rejected appeal. Troy's lawyers have just filed for a stay in Supreme Court, according to CBS News. From the Petition:

A stay of execution in order to protect this Court's jurisdiction over certiorari proceedings is justified on the grounds that Petitioner's counsel will shortly file in this Court a Petition for Writ of Certiorari presenting substantial constitutional errors which have occurred in connection with the lower courts denial of his claims that newly available evidence reveals that false, misleading and materially inaccurate information was presented at his capital trial in 1989, rendering the convictions and death sentence fundamentally unreliable. Petitioner's counsel have been struggling to litigate meritorious constitutional claims in the lower courts after having a grueling clemency process, which was denied yesterday.

Attached to the petition is the execution scheduling order which says the window for execution is Sept. 21 to Sept. 28.

5:30 pm ET: Court denies stay motion for Troy Davis. He declines to record a last statement. His last options are the GA Supreme Court and US Supreme Court.

5:15 ET: Former GA prison wardens urge Governor and Prison to allow staff to opt out of executing Troy Davis.

[We] urge you to unburden yourselves and your staff from the pain of participating in such a questionable execution to the extent possible by allowing any personnel so inclined to opt-out of activities related to the execution of Troy Anthony Davis.

3:30 pm ET: Troy Davis' attorneys filed an appeal today in the Butts County Superior Court, the county where Troy is being held for execution tonight. The state's Attorney General has filed a motion in opposition, alleging the defense is engaging in delay tactics.

The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles has refused to reconsider its rejection of his clemency bid. It also refused a defense request today to allow Troy to take a polygraph.

Here's is Troy Davis' last letter to supporters.

Here is a list of vigils being held today around the country.

The Guardian: Ten reasons Troy Davis should not be executed.

Here is Judge William T. Moore's 174 page order denying Troy a new trial. Here is a recap of the hearing.

The schedule:

  • 4 p.m.: Last meal offered.
  • 5 p.m.: Opportunity to record final statement.
  • 6 p.m.: An optional sedative will be offered.
  • 7 p.m.: Execution,
< Wednesday Afternoon Open Thread | R.I.P. Troy Davis >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    His letter (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by sj on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 02:44:57 PM EST
    brings tears to my eyes.

    Very moving... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by kdog on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 03:08:48 PM EST
    it is amazing his heart isn't hardened like the collective heart of the State of Georgia.

    Doubt is the real problem. (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Gerald USN Ret on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 02:47:42 PM EST
    Personally I am not against the death penalty.  There are crimes that I would enjoy dropping the trap under the killer.

    That said, history has shown us that most of the time there will  be a chance however remote that the person convicted of the crime is innocent or at least not as guilty as was supposed.

    For that reason, I think execution shouldn't be an option.  

    However that being said, I will say that some people should be locked away forever deep in a pit away from the sunshine.  

    Charlie Manson (none / 0) (#31)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:26:44 PM EST
    has a parole hearing every so many years....

    Never a chance he will get out but the whole rigamarole is fascinating....


    especially when (none / 0) (#39)
    by desmoinesdem on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:41:57 PM EST
    the case against him seemed to rely so much on eyewitness testimony. I'm against the death penalty period, but if you are going to apply it, no one should ever be sentenced to death without strong physical evidence of guilt.

    With some trepidation, I read (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by Anne on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 03:39:42 PM EST
    Troy's letter, and I guess what strikes me is that if those with the power to impose death had as much humanity as this condemned man does, the world might look a little different.

    I can already sense the fingers poised over the keyboard, ready to tell me that if Troy Davis did in fact commit the crimes for which he has been sentenced to death, the humanity he expresses is along the lines of too little, too late.

    I get that.

    But I also think it has to be said that if a heart or a mind can evolve to a place where such expressions of humanity are possible, why would we choose to snuff it out, even if there is no doubt about someone's guilt?  Should it ever be too late for humanity? It seems to me that state-sanctioned death brings no light into anyone's life, makes no one more positive, evens no scores.  

    And whether we're talking about those who resort to violence on the outside, or those who pull the switch or plunge the needle, why do we see more power in taking someone's life than we do in nurturing whatever positive elements of it that might be there?  

    There's a lot I just will never get, I guess.  The last meal, for example.  I don't know what this is supposed to represent.  Are we supposed to say, "oh, isn't it nice that the man who's about to die gets to go with a stomach full of all his favorite foods?"  I can't speak for anyone else, but, eat a last meal before I am put to death?  I probably wouldn't be able to swallow, much less eat.  

    Troy Davis may have been able to come to some level of peace and acceptance of what is about to happen, but I don't truly understand why we still live in a country where those with the power to impose death are okay with it.

    re: Last Meal isn't necessarily all that (none / 0) (#16)
    by sj on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:50:31 PM EST
    For example, Texas limits last meals to food available within the prison system, though occasionally permitting food "from the free world".[1] In Florida, the food for the last meal must be purchased locally and the cost is limited to $40

    More wrt the Last Meal (none / 0) (#17)
    by sj on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:58:52 PM EST
    The article was rather interesting (in a sad way) with regard to the custom.  It was never intended to be for the benefit of the condemned exactly but rather for the authorities:

    The ritual was supposed to prevent the condemned from returning as a ghost or revenant to haunt those responsible for their killing. As a superstitious precaution, the better the food and drink, the safer the condemned's oath of truce.
    There were practical side effects of a peaceful last meal as well. ... if the mob believed something was wrong or the chief character of the show was reluctant to play their role, things could get out of hand and place the malefactor's guilt in doubt. Hence it was important for authorities that the condemned met their fate calmly.  Apart from having been constantly coerced since the death sentence, the condemned's solemn last meal symbolized that they accepted they met their fate calmly.

    So even that is yet another vehicle of oppression.  I'm with you:

    "I don't truly understand why we still live in a country where those with the power to impose death are okay with it."


    Movie ratings and violence (none / 0) (#21)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 05:28:49 PM EST
    It is very rare in our society that violence will get you an NC-17.  If so, the entire SAW series would've been rated as such.  

    What gets you an NC-17 in this country more often that not?  Sex.

    Even on regular TV violence is okay, sex is not.  We think it fine that children be exposed to tons of violence, but don't show them a love scene.


    No wonder we're so screwed up about both.


    please stay on topic (none / 0) (#35)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:57:23 PM EST
    Troy Davis

    sorry, thought violence was on topic (none / 0) (#37)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:04:39 PM EST
    didn't mean to take it off course, if I did.

    thanks, let's just let this thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:47:40 PM EST
    be about Troy Davis.

    WSWS: entire political establishment responsible (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Andreas on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 03:47:44 PM EST
    The WSWS writes:

    While 51 members of the US Congress have gone on record opposing the execution of Troy Davis, there has been no significant effort from politicians of either big business party to call a halt to it. Barack Obama has made no comment on the impending execution, and his press secretary has referred media questions about the case to the Justice Department.

    Obama is an open supporter of the death penalty, writing in his memoir that while he thinks capital punishment "does little to deter crime," he supports it in cases "so heinous, so beyond the pale, that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment." ...

    The blood of Troy Davis's execution will be on the hands of the entire political establishment. They are implicated not only in his state killing, but in the deaths of the 1,267 individuals who have been executed since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.

    Georgia parole board denies clemency
    Troy Davis set to die by lethal injection

    By Kate Randall, 21 September 2011

    And Texas is killing someone today too (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 03:58:24 PM EST
    One of James Byrd's killers.  If there's someone who deserves it, it is this guy, and still, Byrd's immediate family do not want the execution to take place:

    (Reuters) - As Texas prepares to execute one of his father's killers, Ross Byrd hopes the state shows the man the mercy his father, James Byrd Jr., never got when he was dragged behind a truck to his death.

    "You can't fight murder with murder," Ross Byrd, 32, told Reuters late Tuesday, the night before Wednesday's scheduled execution of Lawrence Russell Brewer for one of the most notorious hate crimes in modern times.

    "Life in prison would have been fine. I know he can't hurt my daddy anymore. I wish the state would take in mind that this isn't what we want."

    Amazing how so many anti-death penalty (none / 0) (#10)
    by Buckeye on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:07:15 PM EST
    liberals that try to stop every execution seem to have nothing to say about this one.  Present company excluded of course.

    Much harder guy to have sympathy for (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:18:30 PM EST
    But still, when the family is this opposed and you STILL go through with it.  Do they not consider that if the family doesn't want it, that maybe it will harm them emotionally to go through with it?  Just callous disregard for the victims they are supposed to be getting "justice" for.

    "I know he can't hurt my daddy anymore" (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:19:10 PM EST
    That quote from a grown man, I don't know why, just really hit me hard.

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Zorba on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:49:24 PM EST
    It made me cry, Dadler.  

    When I said "Present Company Excluded" (none / 0) (#14)
    by Buckeye on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:32:43 PM EST
    that meant people on this site...including you.

    And I did not write my post to disagree with who I was replying to.  He mentioned the Bryd case and it got me thinking that I have not heard a peep from people I often hear from trying to stop the death penalty.


    agree and good point. But what I (none / 0) (#71)
    by Buckeye on Thu Sep 22, 2011 at 12:50:48 PM EST
    don't like is that people are silent on the Bryd case not so much because the murder has that much more heinous than other murders, but because of race.  This also led to abdonimable hate crime legislation.  

    I also think that what should have been noteworthy about the Bryd execution is that the family of the slain victim Bryd did not want him executed.  The family of the victims in the Davis case did (does not make it right).


    Terrible (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by chrisvee on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:33:30 PM EST
    We are a very violent society indeed.

    In general I don't believe the state has the right to put it citizens to death, particularly given the imperfections of our justice system.

    But it's doubly horrifying in this case where the witness testimony is all there is and it's such a mess.

    May those who suffer in this matter receive comfort.

    one hour away from execution. (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jeffinalabama on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 04:59:21 PM EST
    When did we become so uncaring? What happened to US society? Plenty of societies, governments, allow no, NO executions.

    The US. 1st in state-sanctioned killings.

    I'm sorry, Troy. I sincerely wish I could do something for you.

    I almost hope he makes it ugly (5.00 / 0) (#19)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 05:02:59 PM EST
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light...

    But it is his life and decision and I wish him peace.


    I expect nothing from the SCOTUS (5.00 / 0) (#23)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 05:54:27 PM EST
    But I better see every "liberal" on that court raising a big stink of dissent.  If not, no one can convince me the SCOTUS is an issue worth voting for Obama on.

    I know, I know (none / 0) (#24)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 05:55:45 PM EST
    Not how it works in this kind of situation, but I want something from those on the court I should expect something from here.  Lone voices, something.

    Hmm, he weighed in fine.. (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:26:03 PM EST
    ...when his buddy Henry Louis Gates was in trouble.

    Like I said, if he knew this guy, Obama would act differently, anyone would, and THAT"S WHY YOU ACT NOW.

    You know, (none / 0) (#43)
    by Zorba on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:51:52 PM EST
    Mr. Z and I said the same thing to each other earlier.

    Refused to let him take a polygraph?? (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:32:45 PM EST
    They are really, really afraid he is innocent.

      But rather than give them pause, they want to just hurry it up and be done with it.....

    Very horrid, wretched thing......

    Response to this comment deleted (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:03:48 PM EST
    for false information.

    Not every state prohibits polygraph results. In Georgia, apparently polygraph tests are admissible by stipulation (when there is an agreement with the opposing party to allow a test and the results admitted into evidence.)


    Besides, it is totally irrelevant (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:06:31 PM EST
    whether the courts in Georgia consider polygraph evidence admissible. There are no rules of evidence that bind the pardons board, nor the governor in making a commutation decision.

    In Georgia (none / 0) (#69)
    by jbindc on Thu Sep 22, 2011 at 08:25:17 AM EST
    Only the Board of Pardons can determine clemency. Georgia's governor has no power to grant stays of execution.

    To be fair... (none / 0) (#52)
    by jccamp on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:17:39 PM EST
    on the issue of polygraph testing, such tests are inherently unreliable. They can be admissable - as noted - if both parties stipulate. However, the devil is always in the details, and such test's results are keyed to the operator/interpreter. Even proponents of polygraph testing generally will agree that the interpretation of the test results is as much an art as science, or in other words, subjective. In Davis' case, if polygraph testing was something the defense desired, waiting until a day or two before an execution date is not the way to accomplish it. The request (for last minute testing) smacks of another delaying tactic (perfectly understandable).

    But feigned outrage over the denial of last minute testing is somewhat nonpersuasive.


    polygraph II (none / 0) (#54)
    by diogenes on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:40:15 PM EST
    This begs the point which is that people who are antisocial personalities have less skin reactivity to wrongdoing and are more likely to beat a polygraph.  Not that Mr. Davis is necessarily such a person, but again can someone clarify whether he actually shot Mr. Cooper in the face or whether he is considered to have been wrongfully accused in that case as well.  Every Google I look at on Troy Davis only talks about the McPhail death.
    In all fairness, shouldn't questions about a polygraph have come up ten years ago when he was on death row rather than as a last ditch effort a few hours before the execution when all else has failed?
    Also, the prosecutor spoke of ballistic evidence, but the articles only talk of discredited eyewitness evidence and a lack of DNA evidence but don't say if the alleged ballistic evidence was discredited.  

    if you want to support the prosecution (3.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:53:11 PM EST
    please do it elsewhere. You are becoming a troll Diogenes. Please refrain from further comments in this thread.

    murderers (none / 0) (#3)
    by CST on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 03:04:57 PM EST
    They are no better than the people they judge.

    Low point (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdm251 on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 03:09:14 PM EST
    This is one of the saddest things I have ever heard.  

    Society (none / 0) (#6)
    by Edger on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 03:35:22 PM EST
    impresses me all to h*ll...

    I understand why Obama is not saying anything (none / 0) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:09:25 PM EST
     But I wish they provided better statements.

    Whenever a President pardons or commutes a sentence, it is in a specific case.

    The president... (none / 0) (#27)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:22:56 PM EST
    ...oughtta have the balls to say something real.  But Obama is as weak a human being as I can imagine sitting in that chair.  He could pardon this guy yesterday, he knows he should, he's staying silent so his political fortunes don't suffer.  It's disgusting.  You may understand it, but we also understand this: he's a coward of the highest order.  You think he'd stay silent if he knew the person?  Of course not.

    This is it for me with him, no vote.  If he hasn't got enough humanity in him to do the right thing for an American about to die, screw him.  Go back to smoking and get lung cancer for all I care.

    This whole thing is phucking disgusting.


    Commuted I meant (none / 0) (#28)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:24:28 PM EST
    Sorry for the rant.  I gotta go to Georgia in a few weeks, don't really want to now.  Arizona already has my boycott, but my dad lives in GA.

    No, he cannot pardon him (none / 0) (#30)
    by seabe on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:26:31 PM EST
    It's not his jurisdiction. Jesus.

    Nice use of Jesus (5.00 / 0) (#33)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:43:26 PM EST
    Good lord, my man, we twist the law every day for every reason to do every goddamn thing on the planet, including GO TO WAR, we can certainly twist it to do the right thing here.

    The case is a clear violation of his right to a fair trial.  If that doesn't bring federal law into things, so be it, we're in worse shape than I thought.

    During the civil rights uprisings, the federal government had no problem going beyond its jurisdiction, BTW, and I hate to break it to you...The FBI pisses on local law every day.


    Jesus aside, (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:04:31 PM EST
    the President of the United States cannot commute the sentence of a person convicted in a state court.  Under our Constitution, we do have a federal system, where the state and federal governments have separate domains.  This is not doubtful, or subject to some kind of interpretation of a vague legal concept.  He simply cannot.

    I believe you (none / 0) (#53)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:20:18 PM EST
    I have also lived through the constitution being completely ignored in the last generation when we want to go bomb or invade.  I just don't see the logical ends.  But it is what it is: idiocy and malevolence carried out under the banner of fake justice.

    Reports now that (none / 0) (#26)
    by Makarov on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 06:17:51 PM EST
    SCOTUS issued a "reprieve" - asked GA Dept of Corrections to not execute Davis while they consider a stay.

    Delay by the Supreme Court (none / 0) (#38)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 07:30:20 PM EST
    Does that mean that Justice Kennedy may halt the whole thing?  

    And could this be a catalyst for declaring the whole current system unconstitutional?

    To my surprise, most likely (none / 0) (#47)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:09:43 PM EST
    someone is writing something, for there to have been a two-hour delay.  The Court won't act (nor would I expect even a single "liberal" Justice to dissent) unless the latest petition actually presents a substantial federal constitutional question that is not procedurally barred and which it is reasonably possible to think the Supreme Court might take up for decision on the merits.  They are not a super-pardons board.  They function totally as a court of law.

    Now that it's three hours or more (none / 0) (#56)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 09:11:18 PM EST
    I think Ginsburg or Breyer is writing a dissent from the denial of a stay.

    Wrong again. (Me, that is.) (none / 0) (#58)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 09:30:12 PM EST
    Final stay denied.  No dissent noted.

    see my comment #44 (none / 0) (#48)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:12:41 PM EST
    U.S. Const., art. II, sec. 2, clause 1 ("The President ... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in cases of Impeachment.").

    what if civil rights are found... (none / 0) (#50)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:16:44 PM EST
    ...to have been violated?

    And is Georgia not part of the U.S.?

    I know, I know, I'm grasping, but we twist so many things for so many reasons, sigh....

    Thanks for the expertise, Peter.


    I think that was me (none / 0) (#49)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 08:14:59 PM EST
    Yes, I believe it's federal. I was flailing back then, looking for hope.  Seems if a president wanted to, he could easily see this as a violation of his civil rights and act.  During the civil rights movement, the feds violated state laws left and right because injustice was being done.  My other example was the FBI, who has little to no respect for local or state authority ever when they feel they need not to.  I have personally witnessed the FBI in the act of doing this, trying to intimidate a female employee of a MailBoxes Etc. to open a box they wanted opened without having a warrant.  She refused and said she could get fired for it, or the renter of the box could have her arrested.  The FBI agents then, I kid you not, put their hands on their hips just so their jackets would open slightly and she could see their guns.

    one thing i noted (none / 0) (#57)
    by cpinva on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 09:16:49 PM EST
    from the opinion of judge moore:

    nothing mentioned at all about gunshot residue, or that a test was ever performed on any of the three parties involved in the event.

    a revolver, when fired, will leave gunpowder residue on the person doing the firing. in this case, the weapon was fired multiple times, leaving residue each time. yet, there is nothing in judge moore's recitation of the facts to indicate that this test was ever done, much less what the results were. this test is not of recent origin, so lack of availability can't explain its absence from the record. conceivably, the three individuals were apprehended so long after the fact, that the police/crime lab deemed the possibility of residue still being there so slim, that it was not considered worthwhile to perform the test. except, mr. coles was voluntarily in the police station shortly after the events in question.

    i am baffled by the fact that no mention is made of the lack of this basic test being performed, by defense counsel.

    in all, i was not impressed by the state's case, maybe i had to be there.

    Stay denied; execution tonight (none / 0) (#59)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 09:35:17 PM EST

    Justice Thomas (none / 0) (#60)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 09:47:02 PM EST
    Of course.  Mr. I-have-no-thoughts-or-questions-or- intellectual-curiosity-of-any-sort.  The corrupt member of the court.  What a sick phucking irony that is.  RIP, Troy.  Good luck with your artificial heart, Clarence.

    You have misunderstood the Order, Dadler (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 10:01:13 PM EST
    Justice Thomas chose not to rule on his own, but rather "referred" the application to the whole Court (all nine) for a single ruling. (This is standard practice in capital stay actions.) There was no noted dissent.  If someone was going to write in dissent, s/he would have noted a dissent on the order, along with the fact that an opinion would follow.

    Thanks for the correction (none / 0) (#63)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 10:08:53 PM EST
    I knew dissenting opinions had to mean more people heard it, but I couldn't remember if one hears if or all, thanks again for the clarification.  The whole thing stinks, and our system just can't handle these cases fairly, that seems the basic truth.  And Thomas is a lousy justice, and ougtta be kicked off for conflicts of interest anyway, so I don't feel that bad, ahem.  

    I'm surprised by no dissent.  More than surprised.

    Thanks for all the help again, my ranting ignorance ain't no help.  These cases just burn my soul.


    No problem. (none / 0) (#64)
    by Peter G on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 10:13:45 PM EST
    I'm sick about it too, but after 35 yrs as a criminal defense lawyer, can also maintain a calm demeanor in the face of it all. It's not a knock on you at all; your anger and frustration are totally appropriate and on the mark.

    Though, correct me if I'm wrong here... (none / 0) (#70)
    by Dadler on Thu Sep 22, 2011 at 10:58:43 AM EST
    ...couldn't the President have delayed the execution by ordering a federal investigation into it?

    And no dissenting opinions (none / 0) (#61)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 09:49:32 PM EST
    Might they come later, J?  Just curious.  I assumed only Thomas saw the petition.  If none are coming, wow, those lefties on the court really have some spine.  

    Is it possible (none / 0) (#66)
    by NYShooter on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 10:17:17 PM EST
    there actually were dissents, but for fear of civil unrest they chose to make it unanimous?

    There ain't enough room in Hell (none / 0) (#68)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Sep 21, 2011 at 10:34:51 PM EST
    for the corruption born of this human race.