<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The horse sings: In re Troy Anthony Davis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://newsrackblog.com/2009/08/19/the-horse-sings/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://newsrackblog.com/2009/08/19/the-horse-sings/</link>
	<description>a citizen's journal by Thomas Nephew</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 00:20:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Nephew</title>
		<link>http://newsrackblog.com/2009/08/19/the-horse-sings/#comment-5832</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Nephew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 14:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newsrackblog.com/?p=2681#comment-5832</guid>
		<description>Incidentally, I'm writing from an Internet cafe in Maine -- if I don't respond to comments, it's because I'm not on the net as often for the next week or so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Incidentally, I&#8217;m writing from an Internet cafe in Maine &#8212; if I don&#8217;t respond to comments, it&#8217;s because I&#8217;m not on the net as often for the next week or so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Nephew</title>
		<link>http://newsrackblog.com/2009/08/19/the-horse-sings/#comment-5831</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Nephew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 14:41:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newsrackblog.com/?p=2681#comment-5831</guid>
		<description>You make good points -- politically, it sounds like an uphill battle in Georgia, though there's also been interested and sympathetic coverage there.  I also now wonder about the strength of one of my own points.  Like the amateur I am, I may have been doing some wishful thinking about "innocent" vs. "not guilty."  Though I think the evidence of false testimony still ought to be admissible under the Supreme Court's instructions, it might not suffice for the District Court to direct a new trial, given the remaining 1 (or 2) witnesses against Davis.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You make good points &#8212; politically, it sounds like an uphill battle in Georgia, though there&#8217;s also been interested and sympathetic coverage there.  I also now wonder about the strength of one of my own points.  Like the amateur I am, I may have been doing some wishful thinking about &#8220;innocent&#8221; vs. &#8220;not guilty.&#8221;  Though I think the evidence of false testimony still ought to be admissible under the Supreme Court&#8217;s instructions, it might not suffice for the District Court to direct a new trial, given the remaining 1 (or 2) witnesses against Davis.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mick</title>
		<link>http://newsrackblog.com/2009/08/19/the-horse-sings/#comment-5820</link>
		<dc:creator>mick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:35:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newsrackblog.com/?p=2681#comment-5820</guid>
		<description>I thought your post was pungent enough (as usual) to justify a reply, and it went on longer than a comment ought to be so once again an attempt to comment here turns instead into a new blog post. It's &lt;a href="http://arran.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/the-troy-davis-conundrum/" rel="nofollow"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; if you want to read the whole thing but what it boils down to is that I don't disagree with you legally. Politically, however, it's a whole different ballgame and much less optimistic than a decision based on rational legal reasoning would be. Not to put too fine a point on it, Georgia's legal eagles aren't particularly rational, not about the Davis case at ant rate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought your post was pungent enough (as usual) to justify a reply, and it went on longer than a comment ought to be so once again an attempt to comment here turns instead into a new blog post. It&#8217;s <a href="http://arran.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/the-troy-davis-conundrum/" rel="nofollow">here</a> if you want to read the whole thing but what it boils down to is that I don&#8217;t disagree with you legally. Politically, however, it&#8217;s a whole different ballgame and much less optimistic than a decision based on rational legal reasoning would be. Not to put too fine a point on it, Georgia&#8217;s legal eagles aren&#8217;t particularly rational, not about the Davis case at ant rate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Troy Davis Conundrum &#171; Mick Arran</title>
		<link>http://newsrackblog.com/2009/08/19/the-horse-sings/#comment-5819</link>
		<dc:creator>The Troy Davis Conundrum &#171; Mick Arran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:26:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://newsrackblog.com/?p=2681#comment-5819</guid>
		<description>[...] 20, 2009 &#183; Leave a Comment  Thomas Nephew at newsrack thinks there may be more hope in the Supreme Court&#8217;s language than I do, and he has a point. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 20, 2009 &middot; Leave a Comment  Thomas Nephew at newsrack thinks there may be more hope in the Supreme Court&#8217;s language than I do, and he has a point. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

