Within the past month, there have been two murder cases that have captured worldwide attention. The two principles involved were Troy Davis and Amanda Knox. Both individuals initially were convicted of murdering someone and, though there was a lot of evidence to indicate these convictions were not just ones, their cases resulted in very different endings.
Troy Davis was convicted of murdering a police officer in the State of Georgia. There was no physical or even trace DNA evidence linking him to the crime. He was convicted on the strength of nine eyewitness statements. Later, seven of those eyewitnesses recanted part or all of their testimony. Of the two people who did not recant, one was another of the initial suspects in the shooting.
Amanda Knox was convicted of raping and murdering her 21 year old roommate -- along with two others -- in Italy. While there was DNA evidence linking her to the crime, this evidence later was called into question. In addition, during her initial interrogation, Knox made statements placing her at the scene of the crime; statements she later recanted.
Though the initial presumption of guilt of both Davis and Knox was believed to be dubious by many, Davis was executed as sentenced and Knox was exonerated and set free.
None of us can know with any degree of absolute certainty whether or not either Davis or Knox is guilty or innocent. We weren't present when the crimes were committed. What we can ascertain is that the initial convictions were troubling in both cases. It can be argued that there wasn't enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict either one of them.
So, what differentiates these two drastically different outcomes? Race and class play a factor. Davis was a poor black man whose defense was left in the hands of a public defender. Knox is white and from a well-to-do Seattle family. Her family was able to retain experienced and quality legal counsel.
Another important factor is where the appeals took place. Davis had to wend his way through the court systems in Georgia and the federal courts of the US. Historically, the American justice system doesn't like to admit mistakes -- like wrongful conviction -- even when someone's life is at stake. Sadly, innocence isn't necessarily a strong defense against a scheduled execution!
Knox was fortunate that her appeals were heard by an Italian court. Not only did they appear willing to admit to prosecutorial mistakes, but I'm sure they were being pressured by elements within the US government.
So, Knox is coming home to Washington to reclaim her life, while Davis's body is six feet underground.
Troy Davis was convicted of murdering a police officer in the State of Georgia. There was no physical or even trace DNA evidence linking him to the crime. He was convicted on the strength of nine eyewitness statements. Later, seven of those eyewitnesses recanted part or all of their testimony. Of the two people who did not recant, one was another of the initial suspects in the shooting.
Amanda Knox was convicted of raping and murdering her 21 year old roommate -- along with two others -- in Italy. While there was DNA evidence linking her to the crime, this evidence later was called into question. In addition, during her initial interrogation, Knox made statements placing her at the scene of the crime; statements she later recanted.
Though the initial presumption of guilt of both Davis and Knox was believed to be dubious by many, Davis was executed as sentenced and Knox was exonerated and set free.
None of us can know with any degree of absolute certainty whether or not either Davis or Knox is guilty or innocent. We weren't present when the crimes were committed. What we can ascertain is that the initial convictions were troubling in both cases. It can be argued that there wasn't enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict either one of them.
So, what differentiates these two drastically different outcomes? Race and class play a factor. Davis was a poor black man whose defense was left in the hands of a public defender. Knox is white and from a well-to-do Seattle family. Her family was able to retain experienced and quality legal counsel.
Another important factor is where the appeals took place. Davis had to wend his way through the court systems in Georgia and the federal courts of the US. Historically, the American justice system doesn't like to admit mistakes -- like wrongful conviction -- even when someone's life is at stake. Sadly, innocence isn't necessarily a strong defense against a scheduled execution!
Knox was fortunate that her appeals were heard by an Italian court. Not only did they appear willing to admit to prosecutorial mistakes, but I'm sure they were being pressured by elements within the US government.
So, Knox is coming home to Washington to reclaim her life, while Davis's body is six feet underground.
I started to write something similar to this yesterday afternoon when I heard about the Knox reversal, but decided against it. Thanks for voicing my sentiments very well.
ReplyDeleteDavis shot another man that night. And there were 34 eyewitnesses, not just nine. Plus, the recantations were not used by the defense. I'm against the death penalty myself, but Davis was guilty.
ReplyDeleteAnon,
ReplyDeleteYour facts are a bit hazy. The prosecution called 34 people to testify, but there were only 9 "eyewitnesses." Davis is alleged to have shot another person earlier and it was some of these same nine who testified to this.
The defense did utilize the recantations in their appeals. They didn't use them at trial because no one had recanted at that point.
You can read about the case here.