Troy Davis Case

736 Words3 Pages

CASE STUDY #3: TROY DAVIS On September 21st of 2011, Troy Davis; a black man from Savannah, Georgia was executed for a crime he did not commit. Troy Davis was charged with the murder of Savannah police officer in 1989. On August 19, 1989, officer Mark Macphail, was going home when he tried to break up a fight between Sylvester “Redd” Coles (a neighborhood thug), and a homeless man. Officer Mark Macphail was shot twice and was found dead at the same scene. Troy Davis was found to be a bystander of the fight and the shooting but denied being a part of the murder. Troy Davis was taken into custody, as Coles implicated Davis as the shooter. The entire case against Davis was based on Eyewitness testimony, Davis’ attorneys obtained recantations …show more content…

There was no evidence which supported that Davis was responsible for the crime, In fact, the only physical evidence collected from the scene were some bullets and shell casings (no DNA or fingerprints). The only evidence present is the eyewitness, and all but 2 of the witnesses have since altered their testimony, citing police coercion in accusing Davis. Nine of those individuals have implicated the principle alternative suspect, Sylvester Coles. In Davis’ case, it seems that some witnesses may have been affected by straight up coercion rather than misinformation or lineup procedures. The fact that witnesses have changed their testimony indicates that they were not merely mistaken about the shooter’s identity but felt compelled to implicate him for other reasons. This shows that the argument against Davis had doubts, the eyewitnesses were not sure themselves. Davis had multiple execution dates which kept being postponed, the reason was the doubt. How can we execute someone if we have no strong evidence against the person? Eyewitness testimony was so strong back in the days that finally …show more content…

Research provided by the Innocence Project shows that Hundreds of people are accused of crimes they have never committed just because of eyewitness testimony and factors which distorted memory. Can we even trust our memory after knowing so many innocent people have been convicted? Coming back to the question: How does crime affect memory? Looking at the studies of Ronald Cotton and Bennett Barbour, they tell us that crime distorts the memory of a victim. In both cases, the victim identified the wrong person as their assailant. They were so confident and sure of their assailant but they turned out to be wrong. This shows us that our memory is not like a recorder that it records everything it happens, there are certain parts which are left blank. We use conformity and schemas to fill in the