Monday, 6 August 2007

Jurors' doubts of Davis' guilt weigh heavily

DEATH PENALTY CASE: Jurors' doubts of Davis' guilt weigh heavily
By Moni Basu; The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Five days before Troy Anthony Davis' scheduled execution, Brenda Forrest got a
call from her husband of eight years.

He had just heard a report on a Chicago radio station about a convicted cop
killer from their hometown of Savannah. The report said serious questions had
surfaced about whether the man was actually guilty of the 1989 murder.

"Oh my God," Forrest said, finally letting go of the secret she had kept. "I
was on that jury. I've got to get involved."

The next day, Forrest called lawyers at the Georgia Resource Center, whose
attorneys help represent Davis. She reviewed recanted testimonies of seven of
nine trial witnesses and also the affidavits of others who had stepped forward
with additional information. Some implicated another man in the murder of
Officer Mark Allen MacPhail.

Forrest signed a sworn statement of her own:

"I have some serious doubts about the justness of Mr. Davis' death sentence. I
find it very troubling that the jury's sentence was based upon incomplete and
unreliable evidence. If I had been aware of this newly gathered evidence and
had the benefit of it at trial, I would not have sentenced Mr. Davis to

Three other jurors in Davis' 1991 trial signed similar statements that his
defense lawyers presented to the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles at a
hearing on July 16, the day before Davis was set to die.

Curtis Wilson, Isaiah Middleton and Cynthia Quarterman also expressed concerns
about the fairness of Davis' punishment after reviewing the revised

The clemency board temporarily stayed Davis' execution.

On Friday, the Georgia Supreme Court agreed to hear Davis' request that he be
granted a new trial. A spokeswoman for the clemency board said it would
announce today if would hold a hearing previously scheduled for Thursday after
the five board members have reviewed the Supreme Court's decision to hear the

Forrest said she believes Davis should not be put to death until the new
evidence in his case is examined by a judge or jury. No court has yet seen the
new information because of a 1996 federal law designed to streamline capital
cases and place a time limit on inmate appeals.

"I can't say for sure if he's guilty or not, but he deserves to be heard,"
Forrest said.

It's not common to have four jurors change their minds based on new evidence,
said one legal expert who has been studying capital case juries for 15 years.

"In this case, the fact that there are any jurors, but especially four with
doubts about the death penalty, would sort of indicate that chances of a life
sentence would be significant," said Scott Sundby, law professor at Washington
& Lee University.

Because of the federal law, however, the difficulty is getting any forum to
hear from Davis' defense attorneys, Sundby said. "I am impressed that the
pardons board is open to this evidence," he said.

Sundby said a lot is asked of jurors who must make a decision of life and

"One of their greatest frustrations is when they have gone through this
process and then they find out they didn't have the full picture," he said.
"There is a sense of betrayal on their part. Their view is: You asked us to
condemn someone to death, and we didn't have all the facts."

Forrest knows that if Davis' execution is carried out, it will be done in her

Since the trial, she has wrestled with her faith and the moral correctness of
the death penalty. She is troubled by the case even more now that she has read
the new testimony.

Forrest was 35 and working as a chemist when she was called for jury duty. She
said few of the witnesses seemed like upstanding citizens, and she questioned
their credibility.

"They were not people who were believable," Forrest said in a telephone
interview from her office in Chicago, where she relocated in 1999.

The jury of seven blacks and five whites deliberated for one hour and 57
minutes before returning a verdict.

In the somber jury room, Forrest said her fellow jurors debated the testimony
of Harriet Murray, who testified that she saw Davis with a "smirky-like smile"
on his face when he shot MacPhail. The jury found her story compelling but
discussed whether she could have really seen what was happening from a
distance and in the darkness of night, Forrest recalled.

After the trial, in a 2002 affidavit, Murray was more ambiguous about who she
saw that night. She no longer named Davis as the killer. Murray has since

Other jurors, Forrest said, talked about Davis' demeanor. She always thought
he had a look of resignation.

There was a conversation about possible innocence. Is there any doubt about
Davis' guilt based on what we heard? the jurors asked themselves.

Then they wrote down their verdicts. It was unanimous.

"I was under oath to vote according to the evidence we heard," she said. "I
was compelled to agree [he was guilty] at the time.'

But the trial troubled Forrest. She never spoke about it with anyone, not even
with the man she later married.

She got on with her new life, far from Savannah, far from the prison at
Jackson, where Davis has been on death row for 16 years.

"What I did was put it out of my mind," she said.

After reviewing the new defense documents, she was eager to know what the
clemency board would decide. "I was sitting on pins and needles to see if he
got a stay," she said.

Now, like every other interested party in the case, Forrest has to wait

If Davis winds up being executed, Forrest says she will have to live with
herself. It will haunt her until her own death.

No comments: