This is a call for people who are interested in working together to organize an emergency rally here in DC and even in other cities across the country, certainly in Georgia, for Justice. The U.S. judicial system has shown itself unwilling and incapable of respecting Human Rights, Troy Davis has exhausted the U.S. system and it is not likely that the Executive branch will act to prevent his murder by the state of Georgia on September 21st, 2011 (just over a week from now).

The purpose of the rallies must be to raise the matter properly before the World Body, using this international campaign to mobilize and organize domestic campaigns to end “Jim Crow” injustice with its "Wars." It under its declarations of war that the United States justifies its crimes, there is the war on the Native, war on "terror," a war on drugs, and a war on crime, the war on Iraq, the war on the Taliban, and of course the war on Libya. All of these wars are on people of color  and everyday people around the world.

Sign the ITJ petition at Change.ORG  
Calling on the Nations of the World to Stand With US  
to Stop the "Jim Crow" Injustice of the United States

Click the link below to Sign the Petititon:

Please also click on these links to the NAACP effort on behalf of Troy:

Listen to: When Innocents Isn't Enough

Produced on 11-8-2007 and narrated by Naji Mujahid of the DC Radio Co-op/Peoples' MEDIA Center, this work is a documentary about the plight of Troy Davis who has been on Death Row in Georgia since 1991; throughout this time he has maintained his innocence. He was convicted with no material evidence and solely on the testimony of 9 key witnesses by the State. However, since the recantation of 7 of them, his case garnered worldwide support and calls for a new trial. 

DC Radio Co-op/Peoples' MEDIA Center, Voices With Vision, Pacifica Radio, Naji Mujahid, Ryme Khatkouda, Thomas Ruffin, Martina Correia, Brian Stevenson, Diane Rust-Tierney, Shujaa Graham, Virginia Davis, Kirsten Bridgeford, and Marcus Garvin.

Special thanks to Free Speech Radio News, WPFW-Pacifica, Monica Lopez, Nathan Moore, and Kalonji Changa.

Music by: Beanie Sigel, Cee-Lo Green, Luci Murphy, Pam Parker 

Please forward this far and wide, post it on your website, download it, copy it, distribute it, play it in part or in whole*.                   
*As with any journalistic work, give credit to the author; Naji Mujahid of the DC Radio Co-op and Peoples' MEDIA Center.

Straight ahead,Naji Mujahid
'When Innocence Isn't Enough'

Justice Denied: Once Again

 The U.S. “Supreme” court, true to its racist inferior character, six-months ago refused to consider the continued denial of justice to Troy Davis. Without an opinion, the court refused to review the repeated denial of habeas corpus relief to Davis by a federal district court judge. The U.S. Supreme Court sent the matter back to the lower court to address the fact that it not only appears from all facts that Davis is innocent, but that his conviction was purely the product of traditional white southern racist machinations by the police, prosecutor, and judge. The lower federal court did nothing but repeat the same systemic denial of due process that it had committed earlier in order to deny Davis justice, and to protect the redneck officials that were involved in creating the travisty.

Troy Davis is a young black man who was wrongfully imprisoned and has been facing execution since 1991 for the shooting death of an off-duty police officer in Savannah, Georgia.  The case against Davis was non-existent and transparently contrived, so much so, that the prosecutors joined it with two other entirely contrived charges in order to give the appearance of a case. In addition to the charge of killing the police officer, Davis was also charged with shooting another person the same night approximately an hour before, even though the prosecutor showed absolutely no evidence that the two inciences were in any way related.  Here is a break-down of the prosecution of Troy Davis: 

  • Davis was charged with two shootings even though there was no material evidence linking the two incidences; 
  • Davis was then tried on the two entirely unrelated cases in one trial; 
  • the prosecution never explained how it failed to come up with any forensic evidence from either incident, having nothing to link Davis to either crime;
  • the trial consisted entirely of manufactured and coaxed testimony from nine people, of which seven have recanted their testimony;
  • the evidence points to a classic southern racist frame-up of Amerikkklan justice  

The prosecution theory against Troy Davis consisted entirely of supposed “eyewitnesses” testimony, as pointed out above, there was no forensic evidence of any type (finger prints, ballistics, powder burns) produced by the police and prosecutor. The prosecutor alleged in a single case that Davis first went to a party, got into an argument with a guy, then later shot him in a happenstance of two cars passing each other traveling in opposite directions. Then, Davis was supposed to have later assaulted a homeless man and the officer attempted to intervene, at which point Davis allegedly gunned him down. Troy Davis was then to have confessed all his crimes to another inmate in the jail, someone he did not even know.  

           Sadly, Davis was tried before, and convicted by, a jury of seven blacks and five whites. But such is the nature of racism and ignorance in this society that a black man cannot even get a fair trail with a majority black jury, logic and reason are overwhelmed with a need to please and conform to the white system. The blacks on that jury felt so beholding to whites that they could not see that, not only were the cases riddled nothing but reason to doubt, but so was the process. It appears from the facts that the police and prosecutor knew who shot the officer, but as is frequently the case in the south, when one white person is killed by a black person the prosecution casts a wide net to entrap as many blacks as possible. The guilty black is then used as the “star witness" to implicate other blacks, as was done in the case of Samuel Johnson, Otis Lee Fairley, and Robert Montgomery in Mississippi.  

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

The constitutional requirement is that the state must prove its case beyond “a reasonable doubt” (Jackson v. Virginia), which the state, without a doubt fell, far short of in this case. Yet, we have the judiciary state and federal, refusing to apply and comply with the standard, even though a man's life is on the line. The only "evidence" presented against Davis was testimonial, which was wholly unreliable, questionable, and suspect at best. In addition to Davis there were four other persons present at the shooting of the officer, Larry Young, Harriet Murray, Darrell Collins, and Redd Cole the key witness. The prosecution consisted of three seperate incidences, with only two being related, the alleged assault on Young and the shooting of the officer. 

Larry Young was the homeless man who Davis was supposed to have assaulted just before shooting the officer. Young testified that he had gotten into a dispute at a pool hall with Redd Cole over a beer and tried to get away from him, but that Cole followed him down the street. Young said that Davis, Cole, and Collins were together as Cole followed him down the street arguing about the beer. According to Davis’ testimony, it was actually Young, in the company of Harriet Murray, who followed Cole.  Harriet Murray was also homeless and Young’s girlfriend, she testified that she saw two men assaulting Young, that she saw one hitting Young with a pistol, being able to only describe the color shirts the men had on even though this incident occurred late at night. Murray only described two of the men, and only as to the color of the shirts they had on, one wore a white shirt and the other had on a yellow shirt. Both Young and Murray were homeless alcoholics who were intoxicated, Murray made no mention of there being a third man, even though others did. 

 According to Redd Cole, he followed Young out of the pool hall and following behind him were Davis and Collins. Cole claimed that without any reason Davis came past him and hit Young, presumably from behind since they were all following Young. This testimony although not entirely contradicted by Young and Murray, it was also not supported by them either, those testimonies had two men assaulting Young, including one hitting him with a pistol. It was at that time that the officer came across a parking lot and was shot.

 At trial Murray seemed certain that Davis was the man with the white shirt on, that it was he who struck Young with a pistol and then shot the officer. Murray claimed that Davis smiled after shooting the officer and then fled. Although the part about Davis smiling was intended to make her testimony dramatic, the fact that she claimed to see all of this would make her initial description of Davis and a subsequent out of court identification critical, but that seems to have been left out of consideration.

Although according to the testimony of Cole and Murray there were four men present, Darrell Collins merely evaporated and only re-appeared in the sheriffs’ office to say that Davis had shot another person an hour before the shooting of the officer. Collins confirmed that it was Cole, not Davis, who had gotten into the argument with Young. According to Cole, Davis ran past him to hit Young, but then he claimed that Davis hit Young while they were arguing and that the officer ran past him to Young and Davis. The officer allegedly came from the direction of the old bus station, the distance between the pool hall and the bus station is one block on a straight away.  Cole said that Davis passed by him to hit Young while they were arguing, which would place both in the same direction from which the officer arrived on the seen and west of Cole. However, Cole claimed and that the officer ran past him, arriving on the scene from the east, the direction of the pool hall. 

 Cole testified that the officer came out of no where without a word and flew past him, at which point Cole claimed to have only “heard” a shot and then began to flee. However, Murray testified that the officer came out of the station hollering, Cole never heard that, but he “heard” shots. At the same time Cole did not say that he saw Davis shoot the officer, after hearing the first shot he started to flee and then heard two more shots. Cole admitted that he had a 38. Caliber pistol on him that night, but that for some unexplained and convenient reason he gave it to another man just before following Young up the street from the pool hall. Unexplainably, the police did not recover that weapon, did not produce the man who supposedly had the gun, and did not consider Cole a prime suspect. And even though Cole claimed that he only heard shots and did not see anyone shoot the officer, he was the "star witness" against Davis. 

Darrell Collins appears not to have testified at all about the shooting of the officer, as if he were never there, he was called to testify about an earlier unrelated shooting of a young man named Michael Cooper. In order to bolster its sagging case against Davis in the death of the officer, the prosecution tied the shooting of the officer to the entirely unrelated shooting of Michael Cooper in another part of town an hour earlier. According to an unsubstantiated claim by the prosecutor, Davis had gone to a party earlier in the day, gotten into a conflict with Cooper and some of his friends, then later saw them driving down the street and fired at their car striking Cooper in the face. However, Cooper himself refuted that story and stated that he did not believe that Davis was the person who had shot him. Cooper testified that he was drunk when he was shot so did not know who had shot him, but that he was certain that it was not Davis.

The prosecution put on Benjamin Gordon to testify that Davis was the person who shot Cooper, but on cross examination Gordon admitted that he could not say for certain that Davis had on a white shirt or that he had shot Cooper. Darrel Collins was the person who initially claimed that Davis shot Cooper, and Collins was also supposedly one of the four people present at the shooting of the officer. However, Collins was left entirely out of the case regarding the shooting of the officer and used only to testify that he saw Davis shoot Cooper, but also broke down on cross examination and admitted that he did not see Davis shoot Moore or anyone, that he had never even seen Davis fire a gun. 

As in most weak and concocted cases, particularly murder cases, there was the standard use of a jailhouse snitch to which the defendant confesses his crimes. Supposedly, Davis confessed to the snich that he shot the officer out a fear that he would discover that he had shot Cooper, but Davis did not shoot Cooper either. There was a woman named Dorothy Ferrell who identified Davis as the shooter, but in 2000 recanted her testimony stating in an affidavit that she felt under pressure from police to identify Davis as the shooter because she was on parole for a shoplifting conviction. In her affidavit, she wrote: "I told the detective that Troy Davis was the shooter, even though the truth was that I didn't know who shot the officer."

In fact, beginning in 1996, seven of the nine prosecution witnesses recanted all or part of their trial testimony. In a 2002, Darrell Collins wrote in an affidavit that the police had scared him into falsely testifying by threatening to charge him as an accessory to the crime. Antoine Williams, Larry Young and Monty Holmes also stated in affidavits that their earlier testimony implicating Davis had been coerced by strong-arm police tactics. Not surprisingly, three witnesses signed affidavits stating that Redd Coles had confessed to them that he had committed the murder.

The Appeals

Not amazingly, Davis’ case was affirmed by the Georgia “Supreme” court, and when the state’s criminal conduct was presented to the federal court on habeas corpus, the state had the nerve to argue that it should have been presented to the state courts first. Not ironically, the federal judge agreed, even though this young black man’s life was on the line. The federal judge also stated in denying Davis’ habeas that the "submitted affidavits are insufficient to raise doubts as to the constitutionality of the result at trial, there is no danger of a miscarriage of justice in declining to consider the claim.”

The denial of the habeas was appealed to the 11th Circuit Court, which heard oral arguments in the case in September 2005, and one year later court affirmed the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, claiming that Davis had not made "a substantive claim of actual innocence…or shown that his trial was constitutionally unfair,” and that it did not find that the prosecutors had acted improperly or that defense counsel had been incompetent.

Davis then filed a petition for habeas corpus with the U.S. “Supreme” court on May 19, 2009, Malcolm X’s birthday. And surprisingly, two-months later the “Supreme” court ordered the Savannah federal district court to "receive testimony and make findings of fact as to whether evidence that could not have been obtained at the time of trial clearly establishes [Davis'] innocence." Justice John Paul Stevens issued the writ and was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, who wrote that "the substantial risk of putting an innocent man to death clearly provides an adequate justification for holding an evidentiary hearing." However, Antonin Scalia dissented calling a new hearing "a fool's errand," calling Davis "a sure loser" and as always, was joined by his faithful kneegrow butt-wipe Clarence Thomas.

The same federal judge that had denied his petition, William T. Moore Jr., limited evidence to hearing from two witnesses who said they had falsely incriminated Davis and two others who said the Coles had confessed to being the officer’s killer. Still, Moore concluded in that several of the witnesses had already backed off their incriminating statements during the 1991 trial — so it wasn’t new evidence — and that others simply couldn’t be believed. He ruled that while the evidence “casts some additional doubt on the conviction, it is largely smoke and mirrors” and not nearly strong enough to prove Davis’ innocence.

The Fact

The fact is clear that the meaning of “beyond a reasonable doubt” takes on a lesser meaning when the defendant is not white, and particularly when he also is not wealthy. The Troy Davis case is filled with nothing but doubt as to the racist criminal misconduct of the police, prosecutor, and judge involved. Thereafter, it was Troy Davis’ turn to prosecute, whereby “proof” then became irrelevant, there never be enough. In spite of the abundance of irrefutable evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt,” evidence that his conviction was the product of fantasy, fallacy, fraud, and naked abuse on the part of the system, the state intends to still execute Troy Davis. Innocence is irrelevant, it simply does not matter, especially when it serves as an indictment of the system.

It does not matter because the sheriff cannot go to jail, the prosecutor cannot go to jail, the judge cannot go to jail, even though they all should for what they have done. They know all along that Redd Cole and no one else killed the officer, but the objective is not justice, it is about racist retribution and reaping a bounty of niggers forever in service to the local good old boys. Redd Cole is one of them, they spared him the death house in exchange for Davis and no telling how many more he has helped to deliver to jail, or how much dope he has sold for the sheriff, or whatever other criminals mischief he has committed for his masters.

Justice Stevens saw right through it, none of the federal judges below did, nor did they care to even try. Unfortunately, the matter was sent right back to the same low-life federal judge who Stevens had overturned and by time the case got back to the “Supreme” court, Stevens was gone, although Ginsberg and Breyer remain, but only as ghosts.

Demand Department of Justice Proceed on the Seitu Complaint 

Against Koon Hunting, Nigger Skinning, and Judicial Lynching Georgia and South Carolina 

In January 2000, ITJ began to draw attention to the very type of abuses and criminal machinations in Georgia and South Carolina to which Davis was subjected. We found and began to expose specific instances of district-wide practice of black and impoverished people being hunted for false arrest by local law enforcement. Upon being illegally seized and jailed the people are then subjected to malicious prosecution, whereby they are then illegally detained indefinitely until they agree to plead guilty. They are held without due process and usually without counsel, there is no due appearance in a court of law after being seized, such appearance is contingent on whether the person agrees to plead guilty.

It was a fundamental denial of Troy Davis’ constitutional and Human right to receive a fair trial for the prosecutor to bind the two shooting incidences together in a single trial where there was no nexus between them as a continuing crime. As the Appellant, Davis was required to establish a showing that the proceedings wherein he was tried and convicted were fundamentally flawed, unconstitutional. The subordination of perjury, the prejudicial inclusion of an unsubstantiated and unrelated crime, along with the destruction or concealment of evidence, should be more than enough. However, because Davis is black and the real criminals in his case are white and well placed, it has never been enough.

After more than a decade, the Department of Justice has failed to take actio to investigate and arrest the perpetrators of this type of racist and criminal conduct by law enforcement and judges in Georgia. In 2000, ITJ reported to the DOJ and the federal court that it was a practice in Georgia to hold and prosecute people without counsel, along with holding them indefinitely without any judicial process. This prompted the Georgia legislature to enact legislation in 2001, providing funds for indigent defense, which still did not address the denial of counsel issue. The intent of the emergency legislation was to try to head off the sure attack on every conviction had in the state, including capital cases.

 The DOJ now claims that the ITJ complaint about Georgia has been referred to the Special Investigations Division, which looks into practices rather than single incidences of civil rights violations. However, it has taken a decade just to get that information and we have yet to see any action. 

You cn write a letter to Eric Holder, the U.S. Attorney General , demanding that his department stop dragging its feet and trying to cover-up the problem of racism in government and move on the Seitu complaint at 950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20002

Back to Navigation