It should not be news that memory fades over the decades. And that alone should not be reason for acquittal, or every sentence would have to be overturned after a couple of decades.
No physical evidence? Only the protesters and his lawyers are saying that to the press. Have you seen the actual documents?
No, this is NOT true.
Read Judge Moore's order in the case in which he painstakingly reviewed ALL the evidence including the supposed "recantations":
From Judge Moore's order:
"To hear Mr. Davis tell it, this case involves credible, consistent recantations by seven of nine state witnesses. (Doc. 2 at 5-11.) However, this vastly overstates his evidence. Two of the recanting witnesses neither directly state that they lied at trial nor claim that their previous testimony was coerced. Supra Analysis Parts III.B.i (Antoine Williams), III.B.v (Harriet Murray). Two other recantations were impossible to believe, with a host of intrinsic reasons why their author's recantation could not be trusted, and the recantations were contradicted by credible,live testimony. Id. Parts III.B.iii (Jeffrey Sapp), III.R.iv (Darrell Collins). Two more recantations were intentionally and suspiciously offered in affidavit form rather than as live testimony, blocking any meaningful cross-examination by the state or credibility determination by this Court. Id. Parts III.B.vi (Dorothy Farrell), III.B.vii (Larry Young). Moreover, these affidavit recantations were contradicted by credible, live testimony. While these latter two recantations are not totally valueless, their import is greatly diminished by the suspicious way in which they were offered and the live, contrary testimony. Finally, Kevin McQueen's recantation is credible, but his testimony at trial was patently false, as evidenced by its several inconsistencies with the State's version of the events on the night in question. Id. Part III.Bii (Kevin McQueen). Accordingly, it is hard to believe Mr. McQueen's testimony at trial was important to the conviction, rendering his recantation of limited value. Ultimately, four of Mr. Davis's recantations do not diminish the State's case because a reasonable juror would disregard the recantation, not the earlier testimony; and the three others only minimally diminish the State's case. these affidavit recantations were contradicted by credible, live testimony."
Judge Moore goes on to discuss each supposed "recantation" in great detail.
Everyone needs to understand that you CANNOT rely on the mainstream media to understand the facts in a death penalty case. The MSM has a larger agenda, to abolish the death penalty, so they don't approach these cases honestly.
It's the same with the anti-death penalty bar. To them, the larger goal of eradicating the death penalty is part of implementing social justice and is more important than the narrow truth of the particular case involved. The ends justify the means for them. If some guilty person gets off because of their work, they're okay with that because they are (in their own minds) fighting a larger battle.
They use certain strategies to game the system and then the MSM comes in with slanted stories to mold public perceptions.
One of their strategies is not to take over the defense of someone tried for a capital offense until the appellate stage. That way, they preserve the argument that the defense lawyer at the trial stage was such a drooling moron that it was tantamount to being denied a lawyer at all, and therefore a violation of his rights under the Constitution.
Another trick they use, which was used in the Davis case, is to go interview witnesses and elicit an ex parte affidavit which includes a statement worded in such a way that it can be argued that it contradicts the trial testimony. Then they refuse to put that witness on the stand again (where he can be cross-examined to see if he really meant to change his testimony), even though that witness is available, but try to limit any new evidence only to the dodgy affidavit.
In this case, if you read Judge Moore's order in which he goes through all of the evidence introduced in this case, it is striking how many eyewitnesses there were to the event even though it was late at night in a Burger King parking lot. There was a van full of people at the drive-through including an Air Force Lt. Col. There was a guy driving into the parking lot to start his shift at Burger King. There was the guy who was pistol-whipped in the head by the perp. There was the girlfriend of that guy. There were other people across the street who saw the perp run away. All of these were eyewitnesses who were immediately interviewed by police. The number of these witness statements, their freshness and the consistency of their accounts is striking.
And much of what happened is undisputed by both sides. It is conceded that Davis was one of three black youths who followed a guy with a six-pack of beer into the Burger King parking lot, while one of the black youths was harassing the guy to give them some beer.
The numerous witnesses were interviewed by police immediately after the event and all were unanimous: the taller thinner black youth with a white shirt pistol-whipped the guy and then when a cop came over to investigate, shot the cop dead with multiple gun shots, and then ran away. Many of the witnesses positively ID'd Davis, and the other witnesses said the taller thinner youth in the white shirt shot the guy. There is no question that Davis was the taller and thinner of the three youths, and there were additional witnesses even beyond those who positively ID'd Davis as the shooter who testified what he was wearing that night.
The cop was a six-year vet who had served his country as an army ranger.
Davis' street name was "Rah" which stands for "Rough as Hell." He will be finding out what hell is really like soon enough.