Over the past year or so, among those efforts I and many others supported was an Amnesty International-driven effort on behalf of an African-American Georgia man, Troy Davis, now 41, who twenty years ago was convicted of murder of an off-duty policeman; it seems Mr. Davis had gone through all possible State and Federal appeals from matters brought up at original trial, this year got the U.S. Supreme Court to send his alleged new evidence claim to a Federal Judge for examination, and the other day such Judge said his new evidence is not credible and even if it were would not change the sentence.

Now, Amnesty International is emailing people, asking them to write letters to editors asking for clemency for Troy Davis (assumedly commutation to life in prison), on allegation of "doubts" yet lingering on the Judge's finding simple...even Amnesty can't give more detail than that.

In essence, Mr. Davis' new evidence was affidavit-based by old witnesses, most of whom recently came to believe they lied in Davis' trial; further, this long-untested evidence was long-promised to show who the real killer was.

Unfortunately, I am aware of no evidence from Troy Davis or his attornies so much as denying Davis was present at the precise spot at the precise time of the killing, himself saw who did it, and prior to his arrest did not report it to anyone including police...so I agree with the Judge it's not an exhonorating recantation to say "Troy didn't do it, some other guy did", where Davis does not deny he always knew someone else did it but stands mute as to why he stayed silent until tried.

Amnesty International, inter alia, would be super-technically correct that a person convicted of the wrong crime should not be punished in a flow under the wrong caption.

But an accessory need only be someone who knows a crime happened and did nothing to bring it to the law's attention (e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_%28legal_term%29 ); Davis' case clearly establishes he did not deny knowing who committed the murder but didn't try to tell anyone WHO until many years later...pending his own execution for it. Neither did he say his presence that night had been by accident, nor did he prevail in establishing he had not been pistol-whipping a homeless man in the first place, suggesting he might not have reported the cop killer, if any other(s), for a vested interest in avoiding punishment for assault.

For these reasons, it seems it would be against autonomous facts to disagree with the latest Federal Court ruling re Troy Davis, and thus I cannot endorse pleas for clemency in his regard.