While we totally agree that people do look pretty stupid with baggy pants and their butts showing, American Idol showstopper General Larry Platt had one 'Piece of Flair' that has upset a lot of widows in the area...
The blue and white pin he's got on the left top of his shirt is a "Free Troy Davis" pin. Davis was convicted for the murder of a Savannah, Georgia police officer in 1989. One of my friends is the widow of a slain sheriff's deputy, and for her and people like her, it has taken all the fun out of Platt's performance. Community activists can be odd people sometimes. They do so much good, but they'll support a convicted murderer the next minute. The pin should have stayed at home. Sad........
.
11 comments:
Is this a late night birthday present post in my wheelhouse?
We gonna have to disagree here. Unfortunately, our system of justice ain't perfect and there are often times when those 12 people in the box, for whatever reason, get it wrong. Whether or not that is the case in the Davis case, I don't know. I do know the case is based entirely on eyewitness and snitch testimony. A mildly retarded person can see the problem with snitch testimony. But I don't know whether most people know the truth about "eyewitness" testimony. It's unreliable as hell. Has been proven scientifically to be so since the 1800s. Want to know how shitty it is? Google Daniel Cotton and read about that case. More importantly, read what the VICTIM from that case has to say about eyewitness testimony, the kind she gave that sent Cotton away to jail for years until DNA freed him.
I also know this: Given the facts we do know about wrongful convictions (as in how many we've uncovered in the past 20 years), it's simply asinine not to allow procedures for new evidence to be used for reconsideration.
It goes beyond being asinine and is downright immoral. Then again, we're talking about a judicial system who has a SCOTUS justice who says actual innocence does not matter. (Scalia actually calling the ruling ordering a federal judge to examine all the evidence a "fools errand.") No shit...their mid-break ruling actually has raised a question of this no brainer magnitude: does the Constitution forbid the execution of an innocent person? WHAT. THE. FUCK?!
As someone who has been involved in wrongful conviction work, I don't think there is anything wrong with this guy wearing the pin. Our justice system is the best in the world, but that don't mean it ain't got problems that need fixing. There are reasonable, smart and rational people who believe Davis is innocent. They have invested a lot of heart, blood, sweat and tears into proving it. But the Davis case is about more than Davis. It's about a fundamental question of who we want to be as a society. And I for one think a little more of a dancing and singing fool for wearing it.
It could be that Troy Davis is truly innocent and he somehow knows it. I don't know the details of the case, but now that DNA testing is so prevalent, there's a chance he could be proven innocent. It's been happening more and more lately.
It's ok Mike, you can say, "you've got a point Bobby".
http://www.thecoastalsource.com/news/local/story/American-Idol-Auditioner-Wears-Troy-Davis-Pin/I5eqcdlb-Ui0X_9QmRCkBQ.cspx
i am ashamed of myself for blindly following the crowd and have removed myself from the facebook fan page which now has 1.5 million!!!
The vast majority of "singers" on Idol should stay home too!
No, that though crossed my mind as well, but jails are full of 'people who didn't do it', right?
They aren't filled with innocent people, but they are there. We know it. We're finding them every week.
But more to the point, jails are filled with people who don't belong there.
I had a recent case where a 69 year old was found guilty of armed robbery. Unfortunately, because most politicians are too chickenshit to oppose stupid bills and acts that target criminals b/c they are afraid of being accused of being "soft on crime," we have mandatory minimums for armed robbery, the crime he was charged with. Without writing all the facts out, suffice it to say the man had never been in trouble. Had been married for 50+ years to the same woman. Yes...he took a bat over to a lying SOB's house who had defrauded him out of $500 and laughed at him and provoked the hell out of him afterwards. Yes, he hit the SOB twice with the bat after the guy refused to give him his money. And then he got shot twice by a .357 when the guy said he'd get the money it was in the glove box and instead he drew down on my client.
And despite all the above, my client got the gun from the SOB (he's one strong and tough old coot) told him to sit his ass on the ground. He then sat in the guys truck bleeding waiting for the cops. While there, he reached into the money bag and took out HIS money.
Unfortunately, the law doesn't allow me to tell the jury that armed robbery has a mandatory minimum of 10 years, while strong arm robbery does not. The result is a jury that comes back with a guilty verdict after a tough trial and long deliberation and find the guy guilty of armed robbery.
But here's where you see the ridiculousness of mandatory minimums. The entire jury stays to see the sentencing. Neither the judge nor the solicitor want to see this guy sent to jail for 10 years. But the legislature has taken away not only the judge's discretion, but discretion in sentencing period. And when that jury heard the verdict, they were visibly upset. I was contacted by two jurors (who graciously provided affidavits on post-trial motions) who were pissed at the result. They felt like they got duped. They heard from fellow jurors who have had trouble sleeping since the verdict.
I mean...what the hell? I really think we did a great job of protecting the record in that case to attack the law on the mandatory minimum issue. I think if there is any chance of changing it, that case is it. (The argument is, in a nutshell, if you're gonna have mandatory minimums, the jury should get to know. You've taken discretion away from the judges, someone should get it. In this case, the argument was that the State be required to inform the jury in their charging on the law).
Sorry for the rant, but it's something I see every day. And that ain't even getting into the BS drug sentencing problems.
No doubt there are some there, and that's a sad story. As someone who had to fight off a BS charge once, I can understand. Like our political system, our justice system is far from perfect, but it usually is fair enough to work. Always could use some tweaking, I guess. If all attorneys cared as much about their job as you did, things would be better...
Can I write and complain to the Pope? He also wrote a letter to the state of Georgia asking for the Davis to have a retrial. So help me with this logic....Fox is wrong to air a previously homeless veteran for wearing a button(which had nothing to do with the humor of the song) asking to free a man; which whom the Catholic Pope also wishes to have a new trial, based on new eveidence that proves Davis did not committ the crime?
No. I didn't say Fox shouldn't have aired it. I'm sure they had enough to do with 26,000 people auditioning in two days.
You said it yourself - the pin had nothing to do with the song, but lots of people in Savannah recognized it, and it's twisting the knife on lots of widows of slain cops across the country all over again.
If the new evidence is solid, it will hold up, and he'll be let go. After 20 years, it better be DNA, not word of mouth from a 'new witness'. Thanks for posting, Donald..
Donald:
The Catholic Pope was a retrial not based on guilt/innocence, but based solely on the fact that the Catholic Church is against the Death Penalty (as am I).
This is a tough case, but even though SOME eyewitness testimony has been proven to be unreliable it doesn't mean that ALL eyewitness testimony is unreliable.
The majority of convicted rapists in this country were convicted based on eyewitness testimony. Not all eyewitnesses can be wrong...and not all convictions can be based on science alone.
I would like to think one day, as the only civilized country with the Death Penalty, that we will move beyond such a savage practice. But until then perhaps the Death Penalty should be based solely on scientific evidence...
Since most of you seem to think that there is a "good chance" that "many" of the in-mates in American Jails are innocent, perhaps we should let them all free and you should invite them all to live in your neighborhoods and play with your kids.
Guy wants to free a man who is convicted of killing a cop and suddenly our judicial system is convicting a disproportionate number of innocent people. Next time you need the police to help you, call the "Pants on the Ground Guy". Disgraceful
Post a Comment