Five days before Troy Anthony Davis' scheduled execution, Brenda Forrest got a call from her husband of eight years.

He had just heard a report on a Chicago radio station about a convicted cop killer from their hometown of Savannah. The report said serious questions had surfaced about whether the man was actually guilty of the 1989 murder.

"Oh my God," Forrest said, finally letting go of the secret she had kept. "I was on that jury. I've got to get involved."

The next day, Forrest called lawyers at the Georgia Resource Center, whose attorneys help represent Davis. She reviewed recanted testimonies of seven of nine trial witnesses and also the affidavits of others who had stepped forward with additional information. Some implicated another man in the murder of Officer Mark Allen MacPhail.

Forrest signed a sworn statement of her own:

"I have some serious doubts about the justness of Mr. Davis' death sentence. I find it very troubling that the jury's sentence was based upon incomplete and unreliable evidence. If I had been aware of this newly gathered evidence and had the benefit of it at trial, I would not have sentenced Mr. Davis to death."

Three other jurors in Davis' 1991 trial signed similar statements that his defense lawyers presented to the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles at a hearing on July 16, the day before Davis was set to die.

Curtis Wilson, Isaiah Middleton and Cynthia Quarterman also expressed concerns as to the fairness of Davis' punishment given after reviewing the revised testimonies.

The clemency board temporarily stayed Davis' execution.

On Friday, the Georgia Supreme Court agreed to hear Davis' request that he be granted a new trial. A spokeswoman for the clemency board said it would announce today if would hold a hearing previously scheduled for Thursday after the five board members have reviewed the Supreme Court's decision to hear the case.

Forrest said she believes Davis should not be put to death until the new evidence in his case is examined by a judge or jury. No court has yet seen the new information because of a 1996 federal law designed to streamline capital cases and place a time limit on inmate appeals.

"I can't say for sure if he's guilty or not, but he deserves to be heard," Forrest said.

It's not common to have four jurors change their minds based on new evidence, said one legal expert who has been studying capital case juries for 15 years.

"In this case, the fact that there are any jurors, but especially four with doubts about the death penalty, would sort of indicate that chances of a life sentence would be significant," said Scott Sundby, law professor at Washington & Lee University.

Because of the federal law, however, the difficulty is getting any forum to hear from Davis' defense attorneys, Sundby said. "I am impressed that the pardons board is open to this evidence," he said.

Sundby said a lot is asked of jurors who must make a decision of life and death.

"One of their greatest frustrations is when they have gone through this process and then they find out they didn't have the full picture," he said. "There is a sense of betrayal on their part. Their view is: You asked us to condemn someone to death, and we didn't have all the facts."

Forrest knows that if Davis' execution is carried out, it will be done in her name.

Since the trial, she has wrestled with her faith and the moral correctness of the death penalty. She is troubled by the case even more now that she has read the new testimony.

Forrest was 35 and working as a chemist when she was called for jury duty. She said few of the witnesses seemed like upstanding citizens, and she questioned their credibility.

"They were not people who were believable," Forrest said in a telephone interview from her office in Chicago, where she relocated in 1999.

The jury of seven blacks and five whites deliberated for one hour and 57 minutes before returning a verdict.

In the somber jury room, Forrest said her fellow jurors debated the testimony of Harriet Murray, who testified that she saw Davis with a "smirky-like smile" on his face when he shot MacPhail. The jury found her story compelling but discussed whether she could have really seen what was happening from a distance and in the darkness of night, Forrest recalled.

After the trial, in a 2002 affidavit, Murray was more ambiguous about who she saw that night. She no longer named Davis as the killer. Murray has since died.

Other jurors, Forrest said, talked about Davis' demeanor. She always thought he had a look of resignation.

There was a conversation about possible innocence. Is there any doubt about Davis' guilt based on what we heard? the jurors asked themselves.

Then they wrote down their verdicts. It was unanimous.

"I was under oath to vote according to the evidence we heard," she said. "I was compelled to agree [he was guilty] at the time.'

But the trial troubled Forrest. She never spoke about it with anyone, not even with the man she later married.

She got on with her new life, far from Savannah, far from the prison at Jackson, where Davis has been on death row for 16 years.

"What I did was put it out of my mind," she said.

After reviewing the new defense documents, she was eager to know what the clemency board would decide. "I was sitting on pins and needles to see if he got a stay," she said.

Now, like every other interested party in the case, Forrest has to wait longer.

If Davis winds up being executed, Forrest says she will have to live with herself. It will haunt her until her own death.

But lawyers for nearly 160 men and women who have sued the Roman Catholic diocese for covering up sexual abuse by clergy members and others say the bishop is merely trying to duck the public specter of jury trials.

Meanwhile, weeks of closed mediation talks with a federal magistrate have failed to produce a settlement of the abuse claims, nearly all of which were filed in 2003.

A key question now is: What is likely to spur a settlement?

Veteran legal observers say to look no further than last month's record, $660 million agreement between Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony and attorneys for 508 plaintiffs to see the effect a looming trial has on settlement talks. The Los Angeles diocese settled on the eve of the first trial there.

The matter of how to value the abuse lawsuits is set to be debated before federal bankruptcy Judge Louise DeCarl Adler on Aug. 23. She will consider a motion by the victims' attorneys to send dozens of the lawsuits back to state court for trial dates.

The diocese wants to take the matter out of Adler's hands, however. Brom's attorneys, in a motion filed two weeks ago, are asking a U.S. District judge to estimate the value of the abuse lawsuits in a way that does not involve testimony in open court.

In a response filed yesterday, attorneys representing the sexual-abuse victims called that idea "forum shopping."

They said the diocese's action is about "fleeing a state court system that has resulted in average settlements well above the amount it wants to pay."

The diocese has offered $95 million, or about $600,000 per victim on average, to settle the abuse lawsuits and emerge from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Diocese attorneys say that offer reflects Brom's goal of trying to fairly compensate the victims while protecting the church's mission of educating Catholic children and ministering to the spiritual needs of parishioners.

In court documents filed yesterday, plaintiffs' attorneys note that the Orange County diocese settled more than 90 abuse suits in 2004 for an average of $1.15 million apiece, and that the Los Angeles cases settled for $1.3 million on average.

In March, on the first day of the bankruptcy case, Adler made it clear that she would "not be deciding the merits of the abuse cases."

She said the value of the abuse claims will be resolved in one of three ways: They will be settled before a mediator, arbitrator or settlement judge; they may be estimated by the U.S. District Court; or they will be tried.

Closed mediation talks continue before Magistrate Judge Leo Papas. An intense week of mediation is scheduled beginning Aug. 13, in advance of Adler's ruling on whether to release the cases for state court trials.

The diocese's request to have the case-valuation issue decided by a U.S. District judge – whose power supersedes that of bankruptcy court judges – is expected to be considered soon. No hearing date has been set. One reason diocese attorneys give for wanting the matter placed before a U.S. District judge is that they hope to again argue that the 2002 California law allowing lawsuits regarding decades-old abuse incidents is unconstitutional.

The diocese has raised that issue twice before in state court and once in federal court. It lost each time.

A man with long experience mediating and deciding such complex and high-stakes issues is retired U.S. District Judge Lawrence Irving.

"I've handled a lot of mass tort (personal-injury) cases, and one thing is typical of all of them: They never go to trial," Irving said.

"What will force the diocese to settle these cases is to set them for trial immediately. And remember, both the bankruptcy judge and a U.S. District judge have the power to remand these cases for trial."

Attorneys at the law firm Kirkland & Ellis – home to Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr – have donated more money to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign than to all the top Republican candidates combined.

Lawyers at Chicago-based Kirkland – also home to Bush administration official Jay Lefkowitz – have contributed $111,950 to Clinton and another $82,651 to fellow Democrat Barack Obama. Donations to Republicans Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and John McCain total $84,750.

Kirkland attorneys gave 28 percent more to George Bush than to Al Gore in 2000, and 34 percent more to Bush than to John Kerry in 2004, Bloomberg.com reports.

In an even more glaring example of politics making for strange bedfellows, lawyers at the firm Jones Day, which represents the Republican National Committee, have contributed more than three times as much to Clinton, Obama and John Edwards than to GOP candidates.

"Firms want to be on the good side of who they think is going to be the incumbent, whether or not that person is good for business,” Bruce MacEwen, a nonpartisan legal consultant in New York, told Bloomberg. "The conventional wisdom is that the Democrats are going to win the White House.”

The largest contribution to Clinton’s campaign came from a law firm – $241,220 from the attorneys at DLA Piper. The fundraising efforts there were led in part by Jim Blanchard, a partner and former governor of Michigan.

Blanchard told Bloomberg that the shift to Democrats "has a lot to do with the war in Iraq, Guantanamo, torture” and controversies surrounding Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

© NewsMax 2007. All rights reserved.

Even drivers suspected of buying a small amount of marijuana, a low-level crime punishable by a $100 fine, faced seizures in many of the cities with the ordinances.

The 4-3 ruling said only state law can mete out punishment for drug and prostitution offenses and without authorization from the Legislature, cities can't pass seizure ordinances that are harsher than state and federal laws.

Many urban city councils said they enacted the seizure laws as a way to combat drug sales and prostitution and clean up some of their most blighted neighborhoods.

The ruling didn't address newer city laws that allow police to seize cars allegedly participating in illegal street races and "sideshows."

Some Tahoe residents have blamed the agency for the fire, saying the agency's regulations aimed at preserving the clarity of the lake made it difficult to clear pine needles, trim brush and cut trees around properties to create defensible space.

In the subdivision damaged in the Angora fire, an assessment found that 19 percent to 34 percent of the homes had created defensible space.

Larry Parker, the personal injury lawyer cited in the television ads, did not return a telephone call by the Associated Press to his Long Beach office Tuesday seeking comment.

The Reno Gazette-Journal reported that the firm sent the newspaper an e-mail Monday that said the firm "has represented over 100,000 injury victims during the past 30 years and recovered over $750,000,000 for its clients."

Tahoe Regional Planning Agency officials said they've seen the ads and the fliers but haven't received any notification of legal action. The agency says it relaxed tree-cutting policies in recent years and can't be blamed for the blaze.

"We've tried to convey clearly that most defensible-space work is possible under existing rules," said Julie Regan, agency spokeswoman.

"If you look at the work that's been done in Incline Village, it's been done under the same rules as the South Shore," she told the newspaper.

"It's unfortunate that some businesses and attorneys are trying to take advantage of this community by using scare tactics."

Agency regulations say: "Leave the 'duff' layer of pine needles in your yard -- do not rake them all up. The 'duff' layer is the dark area at the ground level where the pine needles are decomposing. This matter does not burn easily."

Other residents said they didn't want agency inspectors on their property because they fear they will be cited for violations of the agency's erosion-control measures.

That fear creates a "paralysis" among homeowners who want to make changes on their property, residents and fire experts said last month.

Agency officials say the regulations weren't responsible for the blaze but are open to changes.

"We have been open to amending policies and ordinances in an effort to better address fire safety at Lake Tahoe," John Singlaub, the agency's executive director, said. "Following the Angora fire, a robust community debate is in order to help prevent such a catastrophic event from occurring in the future."

Fliers posted on trees in the burned area also urge residents to mount a lawsuit against the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, which enforces environmental regulations in the Lake Tahoe Basin.

Some Tahoe residents have blamed the agency for the fire, saying the agency's regulations aimed at preserving the clarity of the lake made it difficult to clear pine needles, trim brush and cut trees around properties to create defensible space.

In the subdivision damaged in the Angora fire, an assessment found that 19 percent to 34 percent of the homes had created defensible space.

Larry Parker, the personal injury lawyer cited in the television ads, did not return a telephone call by the Associated Press to his Long Beach office Tuesday seeking comment.

The Reno Gazette-Journal reported that the firm sent the newspaper an e-mail Monday that said the firm "has represented over 100,000 injury victims during the past 30 years and recovered over $750,000,000 for its clients."

Tahoe Regional Planning Agency officials said they've seen the ads and the fliers but haven't received any notification of legal action. The agency says it relaxed tree-cutting policies in recent years and can't be blamed for the blaze.

"We've tried to convey clearly that most defensible-space work is possible under existing rules," said Julie Regan, agency spokeswoman.

"If you look at the work that's been done in Incline Village, it's been done under the same rules as the South Shore," she told the newspaper.

"It's unfortunate that some businesses and attorneys are trying to take advantage of this community by using scare tactics."

Agency regulations say: "Leave the 'duff' layer of pine needles in your yard -- do not rake them all up. The 'duff' layer is the dark area at the ground level where the pine needles are decomposing. This matter does not burn easily."

Other residents said they didn't want agency inspectors on their property because they fear they will be cited for violations of the agency's erosion-control measures.

That fear creates a "paralysis" among homeowners who want to make changes on their property, residents and fire experts said last month.

Agency officials say the regulations weren't responsible for the blaze but are open to changes.

"We have been open to amending policies and ordinances in an effort to better address fire safety at Lake Tahoe," John Singlaub, the agency's executive director, said. "Following the Angora fire, a robust community debate is in order to help prevent such a catastrophic event from occurring in the future."