SIMONE! By Mumia Abu-Jamal
Mumia Abu-Jamal | 16.05.2003 19:42
"She sang songs with bite, and grit, and pride and longing... and rage. Deep, down, boneset rage, at how cheaply life was lived for Africans in America."
In this post:
1. "TO BE YOUNG, GIFTED, AND"... SIMONE! By Mumia Abu-Jamal
2. Yet Another Witness Comes Forward and Refutes The frame-Up Of Mumia Abu-Jamal! (updated version) By STEVE ARGUE
"TO BE YOUNG, GIFTED, AND"... SIMONE!
======================================
[Col. Writ. 5/7/03] Copyright 2003 Mumia Abu-Jamal
"...Our sweetest songs are those that tell of saddest thought."
-- Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822), 'To a Skylark'
When the historical record of the Twentieth Century is finally written, a special chapter will have to be penned about the remarkable and talented singer, who was called Nina Simone (1933-2003).
In any true history, words, no matter how skillfully crafted, or masterfully molded, will fail to capture the brilliance of the woman. Some recording must be appendixed, so that the student will be blessed to hear her thrilling contralto, dark, full, rich as earth in the promise of spring.
Also required, will be a collection of her lyrics, so that no one may miss the words that she dared set to music and bring to life, with a fury, a passion, and sheer artistic courage that continue to dazzle years, decades even, after their creation.
She was an Artist (with a capital 'A') in every sense of the word, but she was far more than that term now suggests. She was proud, imperial, majestic and deliciously arrogant as say, the late jazz great Miles Davis was, in his prime.
The writer remembers her appearing in the late 1970s, in an outdoor, mid-day concert at the Bell Tower at Temple University. She looked out at the crowd with nervous irritation, not fear driven by the uncertainty of her performance, but a barely suppressed anger that there were only hundreds of people gathered to hear her, not thousands.
She sang songs with bite, and grit, and pride and longing... and rage. Deep, down, boneset rage, at how cheaply life was lived for Africans in America. Her "Mississippi Goddamn" was an anthem that stirred, not merely the Civil Rights Movement, but also the Black Liberation Movement: "You don't have to live next to me, just give me my equality!", she demanded. Her songs could also be tender, loving odes to the multi-flavored beauty and spirits of Black women, as in her signature "Four Women", which spoke of the various moods and hues of her sisters.
Decades before Erykah Badu would wear the head wrap Simone did so, and walked as regally as the Nubian princess that she became.
Although she was born in the Jim Crow South, the apartheid way of quiet acceptance was never hers, and she spoke out boldly, in her art, and in her interviews, against the injustices suffered by her people.
When the Nixon-era began, she bid her homeland adieu, and like a generation of other brilliant Black Americans (like the writer, Richard Wright) who could not abide the nastiness, meanness, and racial indignities of the time, she migrated to live with dignity in France.
Some reviewers have pronounced her career essentially over when she left the U.S. during the '70s, never to rise again.
But great artists, like great music, have a habit of resurrection.
In the early '90s, an American film emerged that was a borrowing from the French. Bridget Fonda portrayed an alienated, drug-addicted, youngster who got caught up in a failed drugstore robbery, turned killing. She was spirited into a shadowy spy agency where she worked for the government. The character, when she was alone, invariably played Nina Simone records in the background to reflect her moodiness. The film was titled "Point of No Return" (a U.S. remake of "La Femme Nikita.") A generation of young filmgoers were thus exposed to the wonder and power of Simone's magnificent instrument.
Where are the Simones of this generation? They are there... in the shadows, perhaps; but they are there.
They are perhaps afraid of giving as much as their recently departed ancestor. For, even they know that she sacrificed a good deal to sing the songs that moved her great heart. Such a prospect is no doubt scary.
Yet, one wonders, who among the madding throng will be remembered, not to mentioned revered 30 years from now? How much of what is produced now furrows its way into the heart, or rings the deep bell of recognition in the soul? Who will sing of the wonder, the terror, the beauty, and the madness of Black life in this new century?
Copyright 2003 Mumia Abu-Jamal
*************
Yet Another Witness Comes Forward and Refutes The frame-Up Of Mumia Abu-Jamal!
By STEVE ARGUE
Under oath, and with a man’s life on the line, hospital security guard Priscilla Durham testified that she heard Mumia Abu-Jamal yell out as he lay bleeding in the hospital, "I shot the motherf---er and I hope he dies."
In the original police report by Officer Gary Wakshul, who was with Mumia the entire time through his arrest and medical treatment, Wakshul stated, "during this time the Negro male made no comment." Yet Gary Wakshul stated later that he heard Mumia confess that night. Gary Wakshul didn't "remember" this confession until almost three months after Mumia's arrest when prosecutor McGill met with police asking for a confession. Officer Wakshul absurdly stated that he didn't think the confession was important at the time he wrote his original report. Despite the importance of this evidence a jury has never been allowed to hear Wakshul’s original report.
Security guard Priscilla Durham’s testimony has now been refuted by yet another eyewitness. The half- brother of Priscilla Durham, Kenneth Pate, submitted a declaration through Mumia’s lawyers in the U.S. Court of Appeals and in the Third Circuit Court on April 24, 2003 stating that, “I read a newspaper article about the Mumia Abu-Jamal case. It said Priscilla Durham had testified at Mumia's trial that when she was working as a security guard at the hospital she heard Mumia say that he had killed the police officer. When I read this I realized it was a different story from what she had told me.”
Instead Kenneth Pate asked her, ‘"Did you hear him say that?” [I shot the motherf---er and I hope he dies.] " Priscilla answered, "All I heard him say was: 'Get off me, get off me, they're trying to kill me."
In the affidavit Kenneth Pate also states, “She said that when the police brought him in that night she was working at the hospital. Mumia was all bloody and the police were interfering with his treatment, saying ‘let him die.’ Priscilla said that the police told her that she was part of the "brotherhood" of police since she was a security guard and that she had to stick with them and say that she heard Mumia say that he killed the police officer…”
Despite the importance of this new affidavit, directly contradicting testimony that put Mumia on death row, a court clerk is refusing to file the new evidence and its accompanying remand motion for the evidence to be heard in a lower court. As Mumia’s attorneys have stated in a press release, “the clerk's refusal to file the motion was ‘an unlawful act of bureaucratic usurpation’ which violated Mumia's rights under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”
In response on May 7, 2003 attorneys for Mumia Abu-Jamal were forced to file a motion in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court asking the court to order its clerk to file the remand motion. This clerk's obstruction of justice is just the most recent refusal by the courts to hear evidence of Mumia's innocence, but in the past these decisions had been made by judges.
The statement of Kenneth Pate is only the latest testimony that comes together to prove that Mumia Abu-Jamal is a political prisoner and the victim of a government conspiracy to frame him and put him on death row in 1981.
The frame-up trial of Mumia 21 years ago included the testimony of three eyewitnesses (Veronica Jones, William Singletary, and Robert Chobert) who later said they were threatened, coerced, or made promises by the police to get them to give false testimony against Mumia.
Facing protest and international pressure in support of framed political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal Federal Judge Yohn threw out Mumia’s death sentence on December 18th 2001. Judge Yohn's ruling, while possibly sparing Mumia the death penalty, did not overturn Mumia's conviction or grant him a new trial based on new proof of his innocence.
This decision is under appeal by the State of Pennsylvania, which is trying to reinstate Mumia’s death penalty sentence. In addition, political pressure is being applied by Pennsylvania Governor (D) Ed Randell for the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal. Ed Randell, a racist Democrat Party leader, promised the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal when he ran for governor.
Mumia’s attorneys have also appealed Yohn’s ruling and continue to fight to have the evidence heard and Mumia freed.
In earlier sentencing Mumia had been given the death penalty largely based on arguments that he had been a member of the Black Panther Party. This sentencing, based on political beliefs, was in violation of Mumia's 1st Amendment rights. Former membership in the Black Panther Party was used against Mumia effectively. This is largely because of the way the Black Panther Party was falsely portrayed in the corporate media while the FBI, working with local police departments, carried out a systematic campaign of murder and frame-ups against the members of the Black Panther Party in 1969 and 1970 killing 39 members.
While Mumia Abu-Jamal survived that period of bloody political repression in American history, he was later framed up for a 1981 crime he did not commit.
As a freelance journalist Mumia exposed the murderous police brutality and political repression carried out by the police against the MOVE organization in Philadelphia. That murderous repression was then directed at Mumia Abu-Jamal in 1981 when the Philadelphia Police shot Mumia, beat him, and interfered with his medical treatment. Failing to murder Mumia in the street and in the hospital the Philadelphia Police and DA then framed him on the false charge of murder on Police Officer Faulkner.
In May of 2001 Mumia's attorneys dropped a legal bombshell by submitting into court a sworn affidavit that contains the confession of Arnold Beverly to the murder that Mumia is accused of committing.
The new evidence that both state and federal courts have refused to hear include the confession of Arnold Beverly who states in his sworn affidavit, "I shot Faulkner at close range." Beverly also states very clearly, "Faulkner was shot in the back and in the face before Jamal came on the scene. Jamal had nothing to do with the shooting."
Arnold Beverly's confession is corroborated by eyewitness statements and forensic evidence. Beverly says he was wearing a green army jacket the night he shot Faulkner. William Singletary was there the night of the shooting. He says he saw a man shoot Faulkner and it was not Mumia. He also states that the actual killer was wearing a green army jacket.
Four eyewitnesses, including two cops, put a man wearing a green army jacket on the scene. Five eyewitnesses described a man fleeing the scene the way Beverly describes he did. Mumia of course was not running anywhere, he was lying on the ground with a bullet in his chest.
According to Arnold Beverly, Mumia arrived on the scene after Beverly had already shot Faulkner. Beverly says that Mumia was then shot by an arriving officer. The prosecution claims that Mumia was shot by Faulkner in self defense as Faulkner laid on the ground dying. Yet Beverly's story does fit with forensic evidence and the report of a cop at the scene that night. The cop stated that Mumia was shot by an arriving officer. The downward trajectory of the bullet into Mumia's chest also makes it physically impossible for Faulkner to have shot Mumia from the ground. In fact five hours after the shooting a police medical examiners report states that Mumia "was shot subsequently by arriving police reinforcements."
On every level Arnold Beverly's sworn confession to a capital offense is in fact backed up by evidence, while the prosecutions version of events is not. This, however, has not been cause enough for the prosecution to reconsider pushing for the execution and jailing of an innocent man. Instead they have successfully argued in court that the new evidence was not brought forward in a timely manner.
Ramona Africa spoke on this point at demonstration of 3,000 for Mumia on August 17th 2001 stating, "Judge Dembe has said she wants, in three weeks, some briefs to determine whether or not it's too late to prove his innocence, whether or not this information comes too late. We're saying it's never too late! What is she talking about, too late?… We aint interested in legalities. We're interested in what's right. Slavery was legal, but that wasn't right! Apartheid was legal but that wasn't right! The murder of Shaka Sankofa down in Texas, despite his innocence, was legal but that wasn't right! We don't care about legality. We care about justice and what is right."
In State court Mumia's attorney, Eliot Grossman put forward important legal arguments on why the 60-day limit should not apply to Beverly's confession, which was first made in 1999. He pointed out that Mumia's former, and fired, legal team of Leonard Weinglass and Dan Williams misinformed Mumia that they were investigating Arnold Beverly's confession when in fact they never had any intention of presenting it for evidence. Williams makes this point clear in his new book "Executing Justice" where he states that he doesn't believe the Beverly confession and that he doesn't believe the police would ever frame up an innocent man. These attorneys allowed the 60-day time line to expire without Mumia's permission or knowledge.
Mumia fired Weinglass and Williams after Williams betrayed attorney client confidentiality in May 2001 by publishing the money making book, "Executing Justice," purported to be an insiders account of Mumia's case. The publication of the book at a critical time in Mumia's appeal process shows that Williams was not looking out for Mumia's legal interests. Weinglass also knew the book was coming out, but did not inform Mumia. This, like their treatment of the Arnold Beverly confession, was a betrayal of the interests of their client and shows that they were not adequately representing him.
In federal court Judge Yohn has ruled that Beverly's confession is inadmissible citing the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996. The act, among other things, sets a time limit of one year for death row inmates to present new evidence. Yohn echoed the prosecution by falsely stating the "petitioner chose not to present his claim to the state court or even to this court until May 2001."
Yohn's chilling decision also cited the infamous 1993 Herrera decision that proof of innocence is no bar for execution.
These rulings and statements of both Judge Dembe and Judge Yohn, along with those of Judge Sabo before them, are in effect saying that an American capitalist court of law is no place for evidence proving innocence.
On September 4th of last year Terri Maurer-Carter, an official court stenographer in the courts where Mumia was framed, came forward with more information on the state of mind of Judge Sabo during the trial. She states in an affidavit submitted last year, "Judge Sabo and another person were engaged in conversation. Judge Sabo was discussing the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. During the course of that conversation, I heard Judge Sabo say, "Yeah, and I'm going to help them fry the n______." There were three people present when Judge Sabo made that remark, including myself."
Judge Sabo presided over Mumia's original frame-up trial, but he didn't just do that. He came out of retirement to rule against Mumia at subsequent appeal hearings on whether or not Mumia got a fair trial. At these hearings Sabo ruled that Sabo had not violated Mumia's legal rights by denying him legal representation of his choice and denying him the right to attend his own trial.
Judge Sabo also ruled for the prosecution against the admissibility of the testimony of a key eyewitness in the original trial, Veronica Jones, who stated that she was coerced through threats from the police into giving false testimony against Mumia in the original trial. Jones was a prostitute who says that the police threatened her with prison on warrants and of taking her children away if she didn't say what the police wanted. She was later arrested off of the witness stand on a petty warrant while she told the truth testifying at a hearing for a new trial for Mumia. This testimony was important evidence of the fact that a frame-up had taken place. Yet Sabo did not allow a new trial based on this information or any of the other evidence brought forward.
In addition Judge Albert Sabo barred Mumia Abu-Jamal from his own trial claiming that Mumia was barred for being disruptive. Yet court records have now revealed that Sabo barred Mumia from his trial at the request of Mumia's incompetent and now disbarred defense attorney at the time, Anthony Jackson. This court appointed attorney made his request on the grounds that Mumia was about to fire him and would if Mumia wasn't barred from the trial. Sabo's granting of Jackson's request was a clear violation of Mumia's right to legal representation of his choice and of his right to be present at his own trial.
Another key ingredient missing in the prosecution's case against Mumia is a motive. Beverly's confession, however, does contain a clear motive. Beverly states, "I was hired, along with another guy, and paid to shoot and kill Faulkner. I had heard that Faulkner was a problem for the mob and corrupt policemen because he interfered with the graft and payoffs made to allow illegal activity including prostitution, gambling, drugs without prosecution in the center city area."
The entire chain of police command that "investigated" Mumia have in fact since been removed from the Philadelphia police force for corruption. At the time Faulkner was killed in December 1981, the FBI was involved in at least three investigations of the police in the center city area for corruption including extortion and bribery connected to the mob, prostitution, after-hours clubs, and gambling in the center city area. Targeted in the FBI investigation were Inspector Alphonzo Giordono, the senior cop at the scene of Faulkner's shooting, James Carlinini, head of homicide, and John DeBenedetto, head of the division where Faulkner worked.
Witnesses and informants in the FBI investigation were murdered. This included a witness who testified against DeBenedetto in 1983.
Police concern that Faulkner may have been an FBI informant could easily have led to his murder. Donald Hersing who was a source for the FBI at the time testifies in an affidavit for the defense that the Philadelphia cops were very concerned about possible FBI informants at the time. In a similar situation the LAPD Rampart cop who blew the whistle on police corruption and murder in LA was released from prison in 2001. He immediately went into hiding out of fear for his life from fellow officers.
Attorney Eliot Grossman stated at a press conference, "Mumia Abu-Jamal was in the wrong place at the wrong time when a hit was in progress on a police officer causing problems interfering with police corruption." But for the Philadelphia police he was at the right place at the right time. Mumia had exposed the murderous police violence used against the MOVE organization. Corrupt police officers used the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.
What we do makes a difference, however. The government's attempt to murder Mumia Abu-Jamal in 1995 was halted by mass protests, including 10,000 people in Philadelphia, and international support. Those actions stopped Mumia’s execution within days of it being scheduled to take place. Continued support for Mumia Abu-Jamal in the streets will be necessary to keep Mumia alive and to free him.
Mumia has sat on death row for the past 21 years, removed from his family. Yet he now stands out as an uncompromising voice for the oppressed and exploited. Many have called him the voice of the voiceless.
The many prominent supporters of Mumia Abu-Jamal include the European Parliament, Nelson Mandela, the Japanese Diet, the Congressional Black Caucus, The Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sam Jordan, Leonard Peltier, and many unions in the United States and around the world.
In addition, Mumia Abu-Jamal has been made an honorary citizen of Paris by the French City Council. That honor was last bestowed on Pablo Picasso in 1971.
Mumia stands up for unions, against war, against racism, for equality for gays and lesbians, for the poor, and against the many injustices of the so-called criminal justice system. Mumia speaks up on many of the issues ignored, lied about, or glossed over by the corporate media and the corporate politicians. We need Mumia, yes we need him alive, but we also need him free. Yet all of the evidence shows that Mumia won't get justice in America's courts unless we turn up the heat.
For protests, teach-ins, and strikes (like the west coast 1998 longshoreman’s strike for Mumia) to: Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! Do not reinstate the death sentence for Mumia! All new evidence should be heard! Abolish the Racist Death Penalty! For a socialist revolution in the United States to free all political prisoners and charge the police for their crimes!
The homepage for Liberation News can be found at:
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news
People may subscribe to the list by sending email to:
liberation_news-subscribe@lists.riseup.net
1. "TO BE YOUNG, GIFTED, AND"... SIMONE! By Mumia Abu-Jamal
2. Yet Another Witness Comes Forward and Refutes The frame-Up Of Mumia Abu-Jamal! (updated version) By STEVE ARGUE
"TO BE YOUNG, GIFTED, AND"... SIMONE!
======================================
[Col. Writ. 5/7/03] Copyright 2003 Mumia Abu-Jamal
"...Our sweetest songs are those that tell of saddest thought."
-- Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822), 'To a Skylark'
When the historical record of the Twentieth Century is finally written, a special chapter will have to be penned about the remarkable and talented singer, who was called Nina Simone (1933-2003).
In any true history, words, no matter how skillfully crafted, or masterfully molded, will fail to capture the brilliance of the woman. Some recording must be appendixed, so that the student will be blessed to hear her thrilling contralto, dark, full, rich as earth in the promise of spring.
Also required, will be a collection of her lyrics, so that no one may miss the words that she dared set to music and bring to life, with a fury, a passion, and sheer artistic courage that continue to dazzle years, decades even, after their creation.
She was an Artist (with a capital 'A') in every sense of the word, but she was far more than that term now suggests. She was proud, imperial, majestic and deliciously arrogant as say, the late jazz great Miles Davis was, in his prime.
The writer remembers her appearing in the late 1970s, in an outdoor, mid-day concert at the Bell Tower at Temple University. She looked out at the crowd with nervous irritation, not fear driven by the uncertainty of her performance, but a barely suppressed anger that there were only hundreds of people gathered to hear her, not thousands.
She sang songs with bite, and grit, and pride and longing... and rage. Deep, down, boneset rage, at how cheaply life was lived for Africans in America. Her "Mississippi Goddamn" was an anthem that stirred, not merely the Civil Rights Movement, but also the Black Liberation Movement: "You don't have to live next to me, just give me my equality!", she demanded. Her songs could also be tender, loving odes to the multi-flavored beauty and spirits of Black women, as in her signature "Four Women", which spoke of the various moods and hues of her sisters.
Decades before Erykah Badu would wear the head wrap Simone did so, and walked as regally as the Nubian princess that she became.
Although she was born in the Jim Crow South, the apartheid way of quiet acceptance was never hers, and she spoke out boldly, in her art, and in her interviews, against the injustices suffered by her people.
When the Nixon-era began, she bid her homeland adieu, and like a generation of other brilliant Black Americans (like the writer, Richard Wright) who could not abide the nastiness, meanness, and racial indignities of the time, she migrated to live with dignity in France.
Some reviewers have pronounced her career essentially over when she left the U.S. during the '70s, never to rise again.
But great artists, like great music, have a habit of resurrection.
In the early '90s, an American film emerged that was a borrowing from the French. Bridget Fonda portrayed an alienated, drug-addicted, youngster who got caught up in a failed drugstore robbery, turned killing. She was spirited into a shadowy spy agency where she worked for the government. The character, when she was alone, invariably played Nina Simone records in the background to reflect her moodiness. The film was titled "Point of No Return" (a U.S. remake of "La Femme Nikita.") A generation of young filmgoers were thus exposed to the wonder and power of Simone's magnificent instrument.
Where are the Simones of this generation? They are there... in the shadows, perhaps; but they are there.
They are perhaps afraid of giving as much as their recently departed ancestor. For, even they know that she sacrificed a good deal to sing the songs that moved her great heart. Such a prospect is no doubt scary.
Yet, one wonders, who among the madding throng will be remembered, not to mentioned revered 30 years from now? How much of what is produced now furrows its way into the heart, or rings the deep bell of recognition in the soul? Who will sing of the wonder, the terror, the beauty, and the madness of Black life in this new century?
Copyright 2003 Mumia Abu-Jamal
*************
Yet Another Witness Comes Forward and Refutes The frame-Up Of Mumia Abu-Jamal!
By STEVE ARGUE
Under oath, and with a man’s life on the line, hospital security guard Priscilla Durham testified that she heard Mumia Abu-Jamal yell out as he lay bleeding in the hospital, "I shot the motherf---er and I hope he dies."
In the original police report by Officer Gary Wakshul, who was with Mumia the entire time through his arrest and medical treatment, Wakshul stated, "during this time the Negro male made no comment." Yet Gary Wakshul stated later that he heard Mumia confess that night. Gary Wakshul didn't "remember" this confession until almost three months after Mumia's arrest when prosecutor McGill met with police asking for a confession. Officer Wakshul absurdly stated that he didn't think the confession was important at the time he wrote his original report. Despite the importance of this evidence a jury has never been allowed to hear Wakshul’s original report.
Security guard Priscilla Durham’s testimony has now been refuted by yet another eyewitness. The half- brother of Priscilla Durham, Kenneth Pate, submitted a declaration through Mumia’s lawyers in the U.S. Court of Appeals and in the Third Circuit Court on April 24, 2003 stating that, “I read a newspaper article about the Mumia Abu-Jamal case. It said Priscilla Durham had testified at Mumia's trial that when she was working as a security guard at the hospital she heard Mumia say that he had killed the police officer. When I read this I realized it was a different story from what she had told me.”
Instead Kenneth Pate asked her, ‘"Did you hear him say that?” [I shot the motherf---er and I hope he dies.] " Priscilla answered, "All I heard him say was: 'Get off me, get off me, they're trying to kill me."
In the affidavit Kenneth Pate also states, “She said that when the police brought him in that night she was working at the hospital. Mumia was all bloody and the police were interfering with his treatment, saying ‘let him die.’ Priscilla said that the police told her that she was part of the "brotherhood" of police since she was a security guard and that she had to stick with them and say that she heard Mumia say that he killed the police officer…”
Despite the importance of this new affidavit, directly contradicting testimony that put Mumia on death row, a court clerk is refusing to file the new evidence and its accompanying remand motion for the evidence to be heard in a lower court. As Mumia’s attorneys have stated in a press release, “the clerk's refusal to file the motion was ‘an unlawful act of bureaucratic usurpation’ which violated Mumia's rights under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”
In response on May 7, 2003 attorneys for Mumia Abu-Jamal were forced to file a motion in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court asking the court to order its clerk to file the remand motion. This clerk's obstruction of justice is just the most recent refusal by the courts to hear evidence of Mumia's innocence, but in the past these decisions had been made by judges.
The statement of Kenneth Pate is only the latest testimony that comes together to prove that Mumia Abu-Jamal is a political prisoner and the victim of a government conspiracy to frame him and put him on death row in 1981.
The frame-up trial of Mumia 21 years ago included the testimony of three eyewitnesses (Veronica Jones, William Singletary, and Robert Chobert) who later said they were threatened, coerced, or made promises by the police to get them to give false testimony against Mumia.
Facing protest and international pressure in support of framed political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal Federal Judge Yohn threw out Mumia’s death sentence on December 18th 2001. Judge Yohn's ruling, while possibly sparing Mumia the death penalty, did not overturn Mumia's conviction or grant him a new trial based on new proof of his innocence.
This decision is under appeal by the State of Pennsylvania, which is trying to reinstate Mumia’s death penalty sentence. In addition, political pressure is being applied by Pennsylvania Governor (D) Ed Randell for the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal. Ed Randell, a racist Democrat Party leader, promised the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal when he ran for governor.
Mumia’s attorneys have also appealed Yohn’s ruling and continue to fight to have the evidence heard and Mumia freed.
In earlier sentencing Mumia had been given the death penalty largely based on arguments that he had been a member of the Black Panther Party. This sentencing, based on political beliefs, was in violation of Mumia's 1st Amendment rights. Former membership in the Black Panther Party was used against Mumia effectively. This is largely because of the way the Black Panther Party was falsely portrayed in the corporate media while the FBI, working with local police departments, carried out a systematic campaign of murder and frame-ups against the members of the Black Panther Party in 1969 and 1970 killing 39 members.
While Mumia Abu-Jamal survived that period of bloody political repression in American history, he was later framed up for a 1981 crime he did not commit.
As a freelance journalist Mumia exposed the murderous police brutality and political repression carried out by the police against the MOVE organization in Philadelphia. That murderous repression was then directed at Mumia Abu-Jamal in 1981 when the Philadelphia Police shot Mumia, beat him, and interfered with his medical treatment. Failing to murder Mumia in the street and in the hospital the Philadelphia Police and DA then framed him on the false charge of murder on Police Officer Faulkner.
In May of 2001 Mumia's attorneys dropped a legal bombshell by submitting into court a sworn affidavit that contains the confession of Arnold Beverly to the murder that Mumia is accused of committing.
The new evidence that both state and federal courts have refused to hear include the confession of Arnold Beverly who states in his sworn affidavit, "I shot Faulkner at close range." Beverly also states very clearly, "Faulkner was shot in the back and in the face before Jamal came on the scene. Jamal had nothing to do with the shooting."
Arnold Beverly's confession is corroborated by eyewitness statements and forensic evidence. Beverly says he was wearing a green army jacket the night he shot Faulkner. William Singletary was there the night of the shooting. He says he saw a man shoot Faulkner and it was not Mumia. He also states that the actual killer was wearing a green army jacket.
Four eyewitnesses, including two cops, put a man wearing a green army jacket on the scene. Five eyewitnesses described a man fleeing the scene the way Beverly describes he did. Mumia of course was not running anywhere, he was lying on the ground with a bullet in his chest.
According to Arnold Beverly, Mumia arrived on the scene after Beverly had already shot Faulkner. Beverly says that Mumia was then shot by an arriving officer. The prosecution claims that Mumia was shot by Faulkner in self defense as Faulkner laid on the ground dying. Yet Beverly's story does fit with forensic evidence and the report of a cop at the scene that night. The cop stated that Mumia was shot by an arriving officer. The downward trajectory of the bullet into Mumia's chest also makes it physically impossible for Faulkner to have shot Mumia from the ground. In fact five hours after the shooting a police medical examiners report states that Mumia "was shot subsequently by arriving police reinforcements."
On every level Arnold Beverly's sworn confession to a capital offense is in fact backed up by evidence, while the prosecutions version of events is not. This, however, has not been cause enough for the prosecution to reconsider pushing for the execution and jailing of an innocent man. Instead they have successfully argued in court that the new evidence was not brought forward in a timely manner.
Ramona Africa spoke on this point at demonstration of 3,000 for Mumia on August 17th 2001 stating, "Judge Dembe has said she wants, in three weeks, some briefs to determine whether or not it's too late to prove his innocence, whether or not this information comes too late. We're saying it's never too late! What is she talking about, too late?… We aint interested in legalities. We're interested in what's right. Slavery was legal, but that wasn't right! Apartheid was legal but that wasn't right! The murder of Shaka Sankofa down in Texas, despite his innocence, was legal but that wasn't right! We don't care about legality. We care about justice and what is right."
In State court Mumia's attorney, Eliot Grossman put forward important legal arguments on why the 60-day limit should not apply to Beverly's confession, which was first made in 1999. He pointed out that Mumia's former, and fired, legal team of Leonard Weinglass and Dan Williams misinformed Mumia that they were investigating Arnold Beverly's confession when in fact they never had any intention of presenting it for evidence. Williams makes this point clear in his new book "Executing Justice" where he states that he doesn't believe the Beverly confession and that he doesn't believe the police would ever frame up an innocent man. These attorneys allowed the 60-day time line to expire without Mumia's permission or knowledge.
Mumia fired Weinglass and Williams after Williams betrayed attorney client confidentiality in May 2001 by publishing the money making book, "Executing Justice," purported to be an insiders account of Mumia's case. The publication of the book at a critical time in Mumia's appeal process shows that Williams was not looking out for Mumia's legal interests. Weinglass also knew the book was coming out, but did not inform Mumia. This, like their treatment of the Arnold Beverly confession, was a betrayal of the interests of their client and shows that they were not adequately representing him.
In federal court Judge Yohn has ruled that Beverly's confession is inadmissible citing the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996. The act, among other things, sets a time limit of one year for death row inmates to present new evidence. Yohn echoed the prosecution by falsely stating the "petitioner chose not to present his claim to the state court or even to this court until May 2001."
Yohn's chilling decision also cited the infamous 1993 Herrera decision that proof of innocence is no bar for execution.
These rulings and statements of both Judge Dembe and Judge Yohn, along with those of Judge Sabo before them, are in effect saying that an American capitalist court of law is no place for evidence proving innocence.
On September 4th of last year Terri Maurer-Carter, an official court stenographer in the courts where Mumia was framed, came forward with more information on the state of mind of Judge Sabo during the trial. She states in an affidavit submitted last year, "Judge Sabo and another person were engaged in conversation. Judge Sabo was discussing the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. During the course of that conversation, I heard Judge Sabo say, "Yeah, and I'm going to help them fry the n______." There were three people present when Judge Sabo made that remark, including myself."
Judge Sabo presided over Mumia's original frame-up trial, but he didn't just do that. He came out of retirement to rule against Mumia at subsequent appeal hearings on whether or not Mumia got a fair trial. At these hearings Sabo ruled that Sabo had not violated Mumia's legal rights by denying him legal representation of his choice and denying him the right to attend his own trial.
Judge Sabo also ruled for the prosecution against the admissibility of the testimony of a key eyewitness in the original trial, Veronica Jones, who stated that she was coerced through threats from the police into giving false testimony against Mumia in the original trial. Jones was a prostitute who says that the police threatened her with prison on warrants and of taking her children away if she didn't say what the police wanted. She was later arrested off of the witness stand on a petty warrant while she told the truth testifying at a hearing for a new trial for Mumia. This testimony was important evidence of the fact that a frame-up had taken place. Yet Sabo did not allow a new trial based on this information or any of the other evidence brought forward.
In addition Judge Albert Sabo barred Mumia Abu-Jamal from his own trial claiming that Mumia was barred for being disruptive. Yet court records have now revealed that Sabo barred Mumia from his trial at the request of Mumia's incompetent and now disbarred defense attorney at the time, Anthony Jackson. This court appointed attorney made his request on the grounds that Mumia was about to fire him and would if Mumia wasn't barred from the trial. Sabo's granting of Jackson's request was a clear violation of Mumia's right to legal representation of his choice and of his right to be present at his own trial.
Another key ingredient missing in the prosecution's case against Mumia is a motive. Beverly's confession, however, does contain a clear motive. Beverly states, "I was hired, along with another guy, and paid to shoot and kill Faulkner. I had heard that Faulkner was a problem for the mob and corrupt policemen because he interfered with the graft and payoffs made to allow illegal activity including prostitution, gambling, drugs without prosecution in the center city area."
The entire chain of police command that "investigated" Mumia have in fact since been removed from the Philadelphia police force for corruption. At the time Faulkner was killed in December 1981, the FBI was involved in at least three investigations of the police in the center city area for corruption including extortion and bribery connected to the mob, prostitution, after-hours clubs, and gambling in the center city area. Targeted in the FBI investigation were Inspector Alphonzo Giordono, the senior cop at the scene of Faulkner's shooting, James Carlinini, head of homicide, and John DeBenedetto, head of the division where Faulkner worked.
Witnesses and informants in the FBI investigation were murdered. This included a witness who testified against DeBenedetto in 1983.
Police concern that Faulkner may have been an FBI informant could easily have led to his murder. Donald Hersing who was a source for the FBI at the time testifies in an affidavit for the defense that the Philadelphia cops were very concerned about possible FBI informants at the time. In a similar situation the LAPD Rampart cop who blew the whistle on police corruption and murder in LA was released from prison in 2001. He immediately went into hiding out of fear for his life from fellow officers.
Attorney Eliot Grossman stated at a press conference, "Mumia Abu-Jamal was in the wrong place at the wrong time when a hit was in progress on a police officer causing problems interfering with police corruption." But for the Philadelphia police he was at the right place at the right time. Mumia had exposed the murderous police violence used against the MOVE organization. Corrupt police officers used the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.
What we do makes a difference, however. The government's attempt to murder Mumia Abu-Jamal in 1995 was halted by mass protests, including 10,000 people in Philadelphia, and international support. Those actions stopped Mumia’s execution within days of it being scheduled to take place. Continued support for Mumia Abu-Jamal in the streets will be necessary to keep Mumia alive and to free him.
Mumia has sat on death row for the past 21 years, removed from his family. Yet he now stands out as an uncompromising voice for the oppressed and exploited. Many have called him the voice of the voiceless.
The many prominent supporters of Mumia Abu-Jamal include the European Parliament, Nelson Mandela, the Japanese Diet, the Congressional Black Caucus, The Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sam Jordan, Leonard Peltier, and many unions in the United States and around the world.
In addition, Mumia Abu-Jamal has been made an honorary citizen of Paris by the French City Council. That honor was last bestowed on Pablo Picasso in 1971.
Mumia stands up for unions, against war, against racism, for equality for gays and lesbians, for the poor, and against the many injustices of the so-called criminal justice system. Mumia speaks up on many of the issues ignored, lied about, or glossed over by the corporate media and the corporate politicians. We need Mumia, yes we need him alive, but we also need him free. Yet all of the evidence shows that Mumia won't get justice in America's courts unless we turn up the heat.
For protests, teach-ins, and strikes (like the west coast 1998 longshoreman’s strike for Mumia) to: Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! Do not reinstate the death sentence for Mumia! All new evidence should be heard! Abolish the Racist Death Penalty! For a socialist revolution in the United States to free all political prisoners and charge the police for their crimes!
The homepage for Liberation News can be found at:
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news People may subscribe to the list by sending email to:
liberation_news-subscribe@lists.riseup.net
Mumia Abu-Jamal
e-mail:
steveargue2@yahoo.com
Homepage:
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
he's a cop killer, fact.
16.05.2003 21:00
Police are brothers, we aren't going to let some communist try and get the killer of one of our brothers off the hook THAT easily. You might think you can post your distortions on websites like this without raising any doubts from people, but you're wrong.
MUMIA IS GUILTY, WHY? Because the evidence of his guilt is plentiful, blatent, and irrefutable. Many trials have proved this! The only reason why people pursue this is because "Mumia" is BLACK and therefore you can follow the standard theme of "racist police"/"racist justice system" as a means of trying to push the idea that the reason why blacks are so disproportionately involved in crime isn't down to racial realities but to some mythical and unproven "racism" rubbish.
THINK AGAIN...
SUMMARY OF THE CASE FACTS
This document details the main issues surrounding the murder of Police Officer Daniel Faulkner. It is intended to give the reader a general understanding of the substantive issues regarding the case against Mumia Abu-Jamal. The information shown here comes directly from the trial transcripts and the original statements given to police.
WHO IS MUMIA ABU JAMAL?
Mumia Abu-Jamal has stated that he spent his youth as an "apprentice in revolutionary journalism" for the Black Panthers. The Panthers were a radical group that, along with their legitimate "social work," advocated violence, kidnapping, drug dealing and murder, as appropriate methods of response to perceived government and police oppression. Jamal, who had no prior criminal record prior to the Faulkner shooting, eventually rose to the rank of "Lieutenant Minister of Information" for the Panther's Philadelphia Chapter. He left the Panthers in the early 1970s and began working for a string of local Philadelphia radio stations. In March of 1981, Jamal was fired from his part-time job as a reporter for Philadelphia's NPR (National Public Radio) affiliate station, WUHY-FM, (now WHYY) in Philadelphia.
NOTE: Along with millions of others, it appears that the Mumia propaganda machine duped us too. When we first went on line, based on the information we collected while researching this issue -- which included articles written by Jamal's supporters -- we stated, "Mumia Abu-Jamal was a longstanding critic of the Philadelphia Police Department." However, since our initial posting of this site we have been contacted by several credible sources, including Pulitzer Prize winning author Buzz Bissinger and various other reporters who worked for local Philadelphia newspapers in 1981. These individuals informed us that, while Mumia Abu-Jamal known in Philadelphia's inner city for his reports on social issues, he was not known as a critic of, or even a commentator on, the Philadelphia Police Department. In his Vanity Fair article "The Guilty and the Dead" (Which is posted at danielfaulkner.com) Buzz Bissinger states that William Marimow (who shared in a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 1978 for reporting on police abuses in Philadelphia, and who is now the managing editor of the Baltimore Sun) told him, "I was very attuned to everyone who wrote about Philadelphia police violence. This guy [Jamal] didn't register a blip on my radar screen." Several other prominent Philadelphia journalists who specialized in writing about police abuse echo Mr. Marimow's sentiments.
Jamal's supporters have always insisted that he was "targeted by police" because he was a constant nuisance to them and had "exposed" much of their alleged wrongdoing. But the reality seems to be that Jamal's supposed commentary on police issues in 1981 has nothing to do with his case, because he simply never made any such commentary. As confirmed by the statement made by one of Jamal's own attorneys - who admitted that the arresting officers likely had "no idea" who Jamal was on the morning of the killing -- this notion appears to be just another article of misinformation on the part of Jamal's adherents.
THE MOVE FACTOR
There is undoubtedly a link between Mumia Abu-Jamal and the violent anti-government, anti-police group known as MOVE. Headed by a man named John Africa, MOVE was headquartered in Philadelphia's Center City. Most of MOVE's members lived together in a single row home in Philadelphia's inner city area. For several years preceding the murder of Officer Faulkner, MOVE's members had been in constant conflict with their neighbors, as well as various Philadelphia City officials. According to comments made to local media by residents who lived adjacent to the MOVE home in 1978, Move's members were armed to the teeth and they would threaten any person who violated the rules MOVE had established to govern the neighborhood. MOVE allowed mountains of trash to pile up in front of their home attracting vermin to the neighborhood and throw buckets of human waste from their windows. Additionally, MOVE's members used a loudspeaker system to blast the militant rhetoric of John Africa from their windows around the clock.
In the spring of 1978, MOVE staged a lengthy hunger strike. Local activists visited the MOVE headquarters in their Powelton Village home and determined that the MOVE members participating in the hunger strike were also starving their children. Arrangements were made to have food delivered to the home for these children. MOVE's leaders first accepted this food, and then threw it back over the fence that surrounded their home. On August 10, 1978, the police were asked to extract the children from the MOVE home. As they attempted to do so, MOVE members began firing at them. When the shooting stopped, Police Officer James Ramp had been killed. Nine MOVE members were tried for Officer Ramp's murder. All were convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms.
According to Jamal's friends and co-workers, he openly began to espouse the teachings of MOVE founder John Africa while at work. The trial and the sentences handed down for Officer Ramp's murder enraged Jamal. According to the station's general manager, Jamal lost all semblance of objectivity as a reporter. Due to his outspoken and inflammatory rhetoric at the station, coupled with several work related violations, Jamal was fired from his part time radio job at WUHY-FM. He failed to find new employment in local media. As stated by many of his colleagues, by 1981 he had become a local media pariah whose professional and personal life had begun to unravel.
Mumia Abu-Jamal had not worked as a reporter for nearly a year, and had taken to working as a cab driver to make ends meet, on the night he murdered Officer Daniel Faulkner.
THE TRIAL OF MUMIA ABU-JAMAL
THE SELECTION OF A DEFENSE ATTORNEY
Mumia Abu-Jamal's trial began with jury selection in June of 1982. Unlike many indigents accused of murder, Jamal was allowed to personally select an attorney in private practice to defend him at public expense. The record reflects that Jamal personally interviewed and selected Anthony Jackson, an experienced local criminal defense attorney, to be his defense counsel.
Anthony Jackson was referred to Jamal by their mutual friend, E. Steven Collins of the Black Journalists Association. Mr. Jackson came highly recommended, having earned a record of success in a number of local murder cases, and having earned a reputation as an "anti-police-brutality" activist lawyer. According to Jackson's testimony, he met with Jamal on several occasions while Jamal was in the hospital recovering from his gunshot wound. Having been selected by Jamal, Jackson approached the Court and requested to be "appointed" so that Jamal would not have to pay for his services. (N.T. 7/27/95, 31-34, 95-101, 117-121) Jackson was a graduate of the prestigious University of Pennsylvania. He had worked for 5 years as an "evidence technician" for the Philadelphia Police Department, (where he admittedly gained an in depth knowledge of legal science and technology) and he had also worked as a private investigator for the Public Defenders Association. For a short time he had been an Assistant District Attorney in Philadelphia, but left when he discovered he preferred being on the other side.
According to his 1995 testimony, prior to taking on Jamal's case, Anthony Jackson had previously represented "no less than 20 defendants accused of first-degree murder." Of those cases, he had lost only 6 times. (N.T. 7/27/95, 92-93) Additionally, prior to the Jamal case, Jackson had never had a client sentenced to death.
Immediately before he assumed control of the Jamal case in January 1982, Jackson was working with an organization known as "Philcop." This organization represented claimants in police abuse cases and instructed attorneys in how to file personal injury (police brutality) lawsuits against the Philadelphia Police Department for various alleged abuses.
THE MONTHS PRECEDING THE TRIAL
Mr. Jackson immediately began to work on Jamal's defense. The record reflects that the court initially allocated roughly $13,000 to pay for Jackson's services and for investigative costs. It later allocated an additional amount, in excess of $1,400 to hire investigative experts in Jamal's behalf. (N.T. 7/28/95, 29-30) Jackson has acknowledged that he also received undisclosed amounts in additional funding from Jamal's friends and family, as well as organizations that began donating money to Jamal.
Jackson hired a ballistics expert (George Fassnacht), an investigator (Robert Greer) and a photographer. Greer admittedly began his work on the case in January of 1982 and, over the next six months, spent over 70 hours interviewing witnesses and developing statements for Jackson to review. Jackson acknowledged in his 1995 testimony that he had spent over 7 hours on three different occasions reviewing the ballistics findings with Fassnacht, and that he had reviewed each of over 75 witness statements "at least 10 times each" (N.T. 7/28/95, 57). In April 1982, he told Judge Albert Sabo that he would be ready to proceed with the trial in early June.
On May 13, 1982, only a few weeks before the trial began, Jamal suddenly and unexpectedly decided to remove Jackson as counsel and personally take control of his own defense. (It later became clear that Jackson's removal was Jamal's first step towards implementing MOVE's courtroom strategy of disruptions and intimidation.) Jamal took physical control of Jackson's notes, the witness statements, and various other important documents. Jackson would later find himself again acting as lead counsel on the second day of the trial, but Jamal failed to return many of these statements to him, hampering his efforts to conduct a defense in spite of Jamal's disruption tactics. (N.T. 7/27/95, 105-9)
Jamal represented himself at his preliminary hearing. In May 1982, he continued to represent himself, with the assistance of Anthony Jackson, before Judge Albert Sabo in an unsuccessful attempt to suppress the evidence against him.
THE JURY SELECTION PROCESS
Selection of a jury began in June of 1982 with Jamal still representing himself. Over the course of two days he personally questioned 20 prospective jurors. By the end of the second day of jury questioning, 1/3 of the available jury pool had been questioned and only 1 of the required 12 jurors and alternates had been selected. Many that attended the 1982 trial felt that Jamal's appearance (he sported a then-unusual "dreadlock" hair style favored by MOVE members), his demeanor, and his aggressive style of questioning, were perceived as threatening by the prospective jurors. Noticing this, prosecutor Joe McGill asked potential juror Ruth Swenk if Jamal's conduct made her uneasy. She replied, "he scares me to death" (N.T. 6/2/82, 2.138). Other prospective jurors echoed similar concerns.
McGill suggested to Judge Sabo that he, the Judge, take over the jury questioning for both the prosecution and the defense. As later admitted by Jamal's attorneys, this was well within the legal guidelines of Pennsylvania law, which grant the trial judge discretion to do so at any time. Judge Sabo acknowledged that the jury selection process was taking far too long. He also noted that many of the jurors appeared to be adversely affected when questioned by Jamal -- an accused murderer -- and was concerned that, if Jamal continued to question prospective jurors, the entire pool might be used up without seating a complete jury.
Jamal became agitated by these comments and began to shout at the Judge. He stormed over to the defense table and ordered Anthony Jackson, who was functioning as "back up" counsel, "not to participate in the proceedings at all." It was at this point that Mumia Abu-Jamal first demanded to have John Africa, the founder of MOVE and a non-lawyer, "represent" him. Jamal stated:
"I don't want him [Anthony Jackson] to conduct the voir dire (jury selection) for me and I don't want you [Judges Sabo] to do it for me. I want John Africa."
N.T. 6/9/82, 3.33
Judge Sabo offered Jamal the opportunity to review the questions proposed by the prosecution for the Judge to ask the potential jurors. Jamal petulantly refused to look at them. He also refused to offer any questions of his own, and instructed Jackson not to look at the questions proposed by the prosecution. He announced that he considered the proceedings "a damned farce." The Judge began questioning the prospective jurors for both sides.
Following the lunch recess, Jackson announced that Jamal had reconsidered, and would agree to personally draft the questions to be asked of each prospective juror if Jackson could ask the questions instead of the Judge doing so. The Judge asked Jamal if his lawyer had correctly stated his wishes. Though Jamal petulantly refused to speak, the Judge decided to take his silence as assent and agreed to the proposal. Thereafter, Jackson asked the questions for Jamal. Having done so, Jackson consulted with Jamal and either Jackson or Jamal would inform the court if a potential juror was accepted or rejected. Through this process, Jamal personally selected his own jury.
The initial racial makeup of the jury was 3 blacks and 9 non-blacks. While the prosecutor accepted four blacks to the jury, Jamal has admitted that he used at least one of his own peremptory challenges to remove a black potential juror (James Burgess) who had been accepted by the prosecution. Another black juror was later dismissed when she violated the court's sequestration order. Therefore, the final racial makeup of the jury that convicted Jamal and sentenced him to death was 2 blacks and 10 non-blacks. It should be noted that a unanimous verdict is required to secure a conviction and a death sentence.
THE CASE AGAINST MUMIA ABU-JAMAL
By any standard, the evidence against Mumia Abu-Jamal was overwhelming. The prosecution case included:
Four eyewitnesses to the crime who stated that Jamal was the killer.
Considerable forensic and ballistic evidence that pointed to Jamal's guilt.
Three witnesses saw and heard Jamal, when just outside the hospital emergency room, triumphantly shout that he had killed the officer.
Jamal himself. Jamal proved to be his own worst enemy at his trial. According to members of the jury, his own conduct in the courtroom convinced them that he was quite capable of committing murder.
THE EVIDENCE
The trail evidence established that the following occurred on December 9, 1981.
At the 1982 trial four (4) eyewitnesses -- none of who knew each other prior to the shooting and each of who was deemed to have testified credibly by the court -- stated that they witnessed the following sequence of events:
At 3:51:08 AM on December 9th, 1981, Officer Faulkner pulled a Volkswagen over for driving the wrong way down a one way street with it's lights off.
William Cook, Mumia Abu Jamal's brother, was driving the vehicle. He exited the car and shortly thereafter several witnesses saw him attack Officer Faulkner, punching Faulkner in the face.
Several of the eyewitnesses saw Mumia Abu-Jamal running across the street towards the scene with his arm raised. Prior to the police stop of his brother, Jamal was coincidentally sitting in his cab across the street in a parking lot.
From less than two feet away, Jamal fired a shot, which hit Officer Faulkner in the back.
Faulkner was able to remove his revolver, turn and fire one shot at his attacker. The bullet found its mark in Mumia Abu Jamal's chest.
The wounded Faulkner then fell to the ground.
Jamal stood over the unarmed officer and fired several additional shots at Faulkner's upper body.
Jamal then took the time to bend down, put the barrel of his gun inches away from Officer Faulkner's face and fire the final and fatal shot, killing him instantly.
Jamal then staggered several steps and collapsed on the curb.
Just 90 seconds later, police apprehended Jamal, his gun at his side, only a few feet from Officer Faulkner's body. They then placed him in the back of a police van.
EYEWITNESSES
Robert Chobert
Robert Chobert, age 22, was a cab driver who had just let out a fare. He was filling out his logbook and was parked directly behind Officer Faulkner's patrol car, just two car lengths away from where he fell. Only five minutes after the shooting, Robert Chobert made an in-person identification of Jamal as the killer as Jamal sat in the back of a police wagon. Chobert was then transported to the Police Administration Building, arriving there at 4:15 AM, where he gave a formal statement just 35 minutes after the murder:
I was writing down on a pad how much my fare was. Then I heard a shot. I looked up and I saw a cop who was on the pavement next to his car, his car was parked a little in front of my car. I saw the cop fall to the ground when I looked up and I saw this black male stand over the cop and shoot him a couple of more times. Then I saw the black male start running towards 12th St. He didn't get very far, maybe thirty or thirty-five steps and then he fell. I got out of my cab and started walking over to the cop. When I got up to him all of the sudden all of the cops came and told me to get back. Then I got back in my cab and I was getting ready to leave, but they had me blocked in.
Chobert Statement, 4:25 AM, 12/9/81
Jamal was found sitting on the curb with his gun on the ground beside him, in the exact spot that Chobert said the killer fell.
Chobert further stated that there was a second man at the scene -- Jamal's brother, William Cook. In his written statement to police, when asked what happened to this man. Chobert said,
"I saw another guy running, but the police got him too."
Robert Chobert clearly stated, that both the man who killed Faulkner (Jamal) and the man who had been in front of the car with Officer Faulkner before the shooting started, (Cook) had been captured.
At the Motion to Suppress, while being questioned by Jamal -- who was acting as his own attorney at the time -- Chobert stated that he was certain that Jamal was the man who shot Officer Faulkner.
Jamal - "You did see the cop being shot - the man shoot the cop?"
Chobert - "Yeah, I said I did didn't I."
Jamal - "Well, you sure did. And you saw me in the back of the wagon didn't you?"
Chobert - "Yes, I did."
Jamal - "What made you certain it [I] was the same man?"
Chobert - "Because I saw you, buddy. I saw you shoot him."
Jamal - "You saw me-"
Chobert - I saw you shoot him, and I never took my eyes off you until you got in the back of the wagon.
N.T. 6/2/82, 2.74-5
ROBERT CHOBERT'S 1982 TESTIMONY
At the 1982 trial, Chobert's testimony was as follows:
"I heard a shot. I looked up, I saw a cop fall to the ground, and then I saw Jamal standing over him and firing some more shots into him. Then I saw him [Jamal] walking back about ten feet and he just fell by the curb."
N.T. 6/19/82, 210-211
Anthony Jackson made sure that the jury heard about Chobert's discrepancy regarding the distance that he had originally stated Jamal "ran" before he fell in his initial statement as it compared to his testimony. While cross-examining Chobert, Jamal's attorney repeatedly questioned him about the fact that he had altered this detail in his story. Chobert stood up to this blistering cross-examination and stated,
"I know who shot the cop and I ain't going to forget it."
N.T. 6/19/82, 27
Michael Scanlan
Michael Scanlan was a businessman who was visiting Philadelphia on December 9, 1981. He was returning to his hotel at 3:52 AM on December 9, 1981, having just dropped off a friend at his apartment. While sitting in his car, roughly 100 feet from 13th and Locust Street and waiting for the light to change, Michael Scanlan watched the entire murder unfold before him. In his statement, given at 4:24 AM, just 32 minutes after the shooting, Scanlan said:
I was coming down Locust St. in my auto, having just dropped a friend off at the Academy of Music at Broad and Locust. I had just stopped at the red light where the club Whispers is located. I noticed the Officer approach a black guy standing outside a car, in front of it. The Officer asked him a few questions and then he spread the guy across the car with his arms out, and the guy turned back around and swung at the Officer. The Officer pulled his Billy club out and swung hard at the guy, hitting him several times on the arm and the back. The guy was bigger than the Officer. Then I noticed another black guy come running across the street towards the Officer and the guy he was hitting. Then the guy running across the street pulled out a pistol and started shooting at the Officer. He had the gun pointed at the Officer. He fired while he was running at the Officer once, and the Officer fell down. Then he stood over the Officer and he fired three or four more shots point blank at the Officer on the ground. I looked around for another Policeman and didn't see one, so I took off in my car to look for one. I found one on Walnut Street about a block towards Broad. I told them I had just seen an Officer get shot and told them where. I followed them down in my car. I lost them but I just went back down there.
Michael Scanlan Statement 12/9/81, 4:24 AM
In addition to detailing the step-by-step process by which Jamal killed Faulkner, Michael Scanlan was also clearly able to identify the shooter by the clothes he was wearing. In his statement Scanlan said:
I saw he [the shooter] had long, wide, sideburns, dark skin, wearing a black knit cap, like over the back of his head, holding the hair in. He had a long-sleeved sweater on. I think it was red and black, or yellow and black.
Scanlan Statement, 12/9/81
In fact, at the time of the shooting Jamal was wearing a red and blue-striped jacket.
MICHAEL SCANLAN'S 1982 TESTIMONY
In his 1982 trial testimony, having first stated that he saw William Cook attack Officer Faulkner by punching him in the face, Scanlan stated:
At that point, the Officer reacted, trying to subdue the gentleman, and during that time, another man came running out of the parking lot across the street towards the officer and the gentleman in front of the police car. I saw his hand come up, like this, and I heard a gunshot when the man got to the policeman and the gentleman he had been talking to. Then the officer fell down on the sidewalk and the man walked over and was standing at his feet and shot him twice, I saw two flashes.
N.T. 6/25/82, 8.6-7
Scanlan described watching the gunman fire into the fallen officer's face:
ADA McGill: Do you know whether or not any of those shots hit the officer?
Scanlan: Yes, Sir. I could see that one hit the officer in the face. Because his body jerked. His whole body jerked.
N.T. 6/25/82, 8.8
Scanlan specified that the man who fired the fatal shot "was the man who ran from the parking lot," wearing "a red-and-blue striped coat or sweater" (N.T. 6/25/82, 8.34, 8.40).
That was exactly what Jamal had been wearing when arriving police found him at the crime scene.
Cynthia White
Cynthia White was a prostitute who was standing on the corner of 13th and Locust St. that morning, roughly 30 feet away from the shooting. Ms. White gave her original statement to police at 4:15 AM, just 20 minutes after the shooting. Her report was given at the same time that Robert Chobert was giving his statement, to a different police officer, in a different location.
In her statement Cynthia White reported:
I saw a Police Officer pull over a Volkswagen. One guy was in the Volkswagen. The Police Officer got out of the car and went over to the Volkswagen. When he got to the Volkswagen, the driver of the Volkswagen got out. They both walked towards the Police car. They got to the front of the car. Another guy came running out of the parking lot on Locust St. He had a hand gun in his hand. He fired the gun at the Police Officer about four or five times. The Police Officer fell to the ground. I started screaming. The guy who shot the Police Officer was sitting on the curb. The guy who got out of the Volkswagen was standing there. A Police wagon came from 12th Street over Locust Street. One of the Officers got out of the wagon and went over to the Police Officer. Other Police Officers arrived. I was trying to tell them who shot the Officer, but they wouldn't listen. The Police handcuffed the man who was sitting on the curb, the man who shot the Officer. Then they took the man who got out of the Volkswagen.
Cynthia White Statement 12/9/81, 4:15 AM
Ms. White described the killer and what he did:
Can you describe the man who fired the gun?
He was a black male, short, in his 20's, and he also wore his hair in dreadlocks.
- - - - -
How far away from the police Officer was the man, when he fired the gun?
A couple of feet.
How many times did he fire the gun?
Four or five times.
What did the man do after he fired the gun at the Police Officer?
He sat down on the curb.
Cynthia White statement, 12-9-81
Jamal was still sitting on the curb when the police arrived.
Speaking just 20 minutes after the shooting, Ms. White had correctly stated that the shooter fired from about two feet away. Trace metal tests performed months later would verify that the officer was shot in the back from a distance of less than twelve inches.
CYNTHIA WHITE'S 1982 TESTIMONY
Cynthia White testified for nearly two full days in 1982, much of it consisting of lengthy cross-examination by Anthony Jackson. Hour after hour, Jackson questioned White about hair splitting minutiae concerning her statements and her testimony. Jackson was especially interested in attacking White's character, highlighting her many past arrests for prostitution, and striving to imply that she must have made some kind of "deal" with the prosecutor or the police. White repeatedly denied having accepted any such deal. The jury had the last word on Ms. White's credibility, and the mesh between the details of her account and those of the other eyewitnesses, as well as the physical evidence, was irrefutable.
Cynthia White testified:
The policeman got out of the car and walked over --- started walking over towards the Volkswagen. The driver of the Volkswagen got out of the car. A few words passed. They both walked between the police car and the Volkswagen up to the sidewalk. A few words passes again between them. The driver of the Volkswagen then struck the police officer with a closed fist to his cheek, and the police turned the driver of the Volkswagen around in a position to handcuff him.
I looked across the street in the parking lot and I noticed he [Jamal] was running out of the parking lot and he was practically on the curb when he shot two times at the Police Officer. It was in the back. The Police Officer turned around and staggered and seemed like he was grabbing for something. Then he fell. Then he [Jamal] came on top of the Police Officer and shot some more times. After that he went over and he slouched down and he sat on the curb.
N. T. 6/25/82, 8.75-7
White also said that Officer Faulkner had his back turned as Jamal approached, and that Jamal was very close to Faulkner when he first shot him in the back:
McGill: How many times did you see him shoot at the police officer?
White: Two.
McGill: And then at that time, where was the police officer's back in relation to the man who was running across the street?
White: His back was facing him.
McGill: Indicating for the record pointing to the defendant, Mr. Jamal. And how close did he get to the defendant -- how close did the defendant get to the police officer when you heard those shots or saw those shots?
White: I'm not good at feet, but it wasn't too far away. It was very close.
N. T. 6/21/82, 4.99
As in her original statement, and as did Robert Chobert, Cynthia White told the jury that she watched Mumia Abu-Jamal slump down on the curb after he shot Officer Faulkner in the face.
McGill: Now Miss White, after the defendant shot the Police Officer when he was on the ground, what did he do then?
White: He went over and slumped down on the curb.
N.T. 6/21/82, 4.105
Cynthia White unequivocally identified Mumia Abu-Jamal as the man she saw shoot Officer Daniel Faulkner, explaining that, immediately after the shooting, she had walked towards the two men and had come within a few feet of them (N. T. 6/21/82, 4.105-108).
As did the other eyewitness, Cynthia White further confirmed that Jamal violently resisted as the police attempted to take him into custody.
White: They took him to the wagon. When they approached him and they went over to him he was swinging his arms and kicking, and they was trying to get him under control to handcuff him.
N.T. 6/21/82, 4.109
- - - - -
Jackson: Before we get back to the specifics of your statement -- did you see Mr. Jamal beaten that night?
White: What I seen was Jamal sitting on the curb, swinging his arms with closed fists and kicking, and the police swinging back and trying to get him under control to handcuff him.
N.T. 6/21/82, 4.149
Albert Magilton
Albert Magilton was a pedestrian who was walking across 13th and Locust Street. Mr. Magilton was standing near Michael Scanlan's car, roughly 100 feet from the shooting. Magilton stated that he watched the entire scene unfold before him, and noted Jamal "running from the parking lot towards Officer Faulkner with one arm raised in a shooting fashion." He looked away only for a moment to avoid an oncoming car. While his head was turned he heard shots. When he looked again, Officer Faulkner was no longer standing. Within minutes Magilton had identified Jamal to police on the scene as "the man he had seen running from the parking lot with his arm raised."
ALBERT MAGILTON'S 1982 TESTIMONY:
I noticed the gentleman [Jamal] coming from the parking lot. He was moving across the street towards where the officer had stopped the Volkswagen. I heard two shots and I didn't see the Officer no more. I proceeded back across the street to see what happened to the Officer. And then as I proceeded back across the street I looked. When I got to the pavement, I had looked down and I had seen the Officer lying there and I didn't see the other gentleman [Jamal] until I -- until I moved closer and he was sitting on the curb.
N.T. 6/25/82, 8.75-7
McGill: Did you later see that man that you saw running across the street and that you saw at the curb anywhere else?
Magilton: Yes, they [the police] were putting him in the paddy wagon. An officer had seen me up there and asked me if this was the man. I said, that's the man I seen coming from the parking lot.
N.T. 6/2/82, 2.95
Robert Harkins - 1995
Although he gave a written statement to police just one hour after the shooting, Robert Harkins was not called to testify by either side at the 1982 trial. However, he was called to testify as a defense witness at Jamal's 1995 PCRA hearing.
Like Robert Chobert, Harkins was also a cab driver, and saw the shooting. He gave a written statement to police at 6:00 AM on December 9, 1981, just 2 hours after the killing. In this statement Robert Harkins said:
On 12-9-81 between 3:30 AM and 4:00 AM while traveling East on Locust Street from Broad Street, I was approaching 13th Street when I observed a police car with its dome lights on. And then I looked over and observed a Police Officer grab a guy, the guy then spun around and the officer went to the ground. He had his hands on the ground and then he rolled over. At this time the male who was standing over the officer pointed a gun at the officer and fired one shot and then he fired a second shot. At this time the officer moved a little and then went flat to the ground. I heard a total of three shots and saw what appeared to me to be three flashes from the gun of the man standing over the Officer. When I saw the Officer go flat to the ground, I drove down the street and at 12th Street and Locust Street I saw a police wagon which was traveling south on 12th Street and I told them that a cop got shot back there and one of the Officers, the passenger, said "a cop?" and I said yea, a cop. At this the wagon turned onto Locust Street and then after that there were a lot of cops that came. It was only a minute from the time the officer got shot until the first cop came.
Robert Harkins Statement, 12/9/81
At Jamal's 1995 PCRA hearing, the prosecution objected to Harkins being allowed to testify about what he had seen in 1981, because Jamal's lawyers had claimed he was being called to testify only about a photo array he had supposedly been shown some time after the murder. The objection was overruled. Obviously pleased with himself, Jamal's lawyer, Daniel R. Williams, Esquire, invited Mr. Harkins to describe what he had seen on the morning of December 9, 1981:
Harkins: I seen the guy [the shooter], he shot the thing, having the gun, the guy [the officer] was lying there. They were spinning around the pavement.
Williams: Who was spinning around?
Harkins: The cop and the - they was like wrestling a little bit and the cop fell down. He [the shooter] leaned over and two, two to three flashes from the gun. But then he walked, and sat down on the curb.
Williams: The guy who did the shooting walked and sat down on the curb?"
Harkins: On the pavement.
N.T. 8/2/95, 208-9
This testimony, presented by Jamal himself supposedly for his own benefit, was devastating. It was, in fact, additional evidence of his own guilt. Like the other four prosecution eyewitnesses in 1982, Robert Harkins stated that the killer shot Officer Faulkner in the face and then collapsed on the pavement next to Officer Faulkner's body. That, of course, was the exact spot where police had found Jamal, his gun on the ground beside him, just moments after the murder.
WILLIAM COOK -- UNWITTING WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION
While Mumia Abu-Jamal chose not to call his brother to testify in 1982, there can be no doubt that Jamal's brother, William Cook, knows who the killer is. Each of the eyewitnesses said that the murder happened right in front of him. When police arrived, however, Cook did nothing to profess his brother's innocence. Rather than claim that things were not exactly as they appeared, or that the "real killer" was getting away, Cook exclaimed, "I ain't got nothin to do with this" (N.T. 6/19/82, 131).
Jamal's failure to call his brother as a witness, either at trial in 1981 or at his PCRA hearings in 1995, 1996, or 1997, can be explained in only one way.
MUMIA ABU-JAMAL -- THE OTHER EYEWITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION
Stating that he felt he had been denied his rights, Mumia Abu-Jamal chose not to testify in his own behalf in 1982.
If someone other than Jamal had committed the murder, Jamal certainly would have mentioned it to someone before allowing himself to be convicted of murder and sentenced to death in 1982. In fact, common sense says he would have shouted it from the rooftops. Instead, this articulate radio newsman absolutely refused to talk about what had happened until the year 2001 -- twenty years after the murder. At that time, he had his latest lawyer release a piece of paper with his signature on it. The paper claimed that Jamal -- found at the scene of a murder with an emptied gun at his side -- had seen nothing.
SUMMARY OF THE EYEWITNESS EVIDENCE:
Mumia Abu-Jamal Remained at the Scene and Was Physically Identified as the Killer By Several Eyewitnesses
Though he attempted to flee, because of his wound Jamal was only able to move a few steps away from Officer Faulkner's body, where he collapsed on the curb. This fact is verified by the testimony of four of the five eyewitnesses to Officer Faulkner's murder. The Police Radio Tape Transmittal establishes that after pulling William Cook's vehicle over and prior to exiting his patrol car, Officer Faulkner requested backup at 3:51:08 AM. The Radio Transmission Log also verifies that the first police vehicle arrived on the scene at 3:52:27 AM, just 90 seconds after Officer Faulkner exited his vehicle to question William Cook.
Based on this information it is clear that less than a minute passed between the time when Officer Faulkner was shot and Mumia Abu-Jamal was spotted sitting on the pavement next to Officer Faulkner's body, by Officers Shoemaker and Forbes, who were the first officers on the scene. The jury heard Officer Shoemaker state that upon seeing the gun next to Jamal, he ordered him to "freeze." He further stated that instead of surrendering, as an innocent person would, Jamal attempted to raise his gun and fire at them. According to Shoemaker, as Mumia Abu-Jamal attempted to reach his gun, he chose not to use deadly force to subdue him, but instead chose to kick Jamal in the throat and then kicked the gun away from him.
Officers then attempted to subdue Jamal, who resisted their efforts. After a violent struggle the arresting officers handcuffed Jamal and threw him into the back of the police van that Officer Faulkner had summoned to arrest Cook. (N.T. 6/19/82, 116)
The jury also heard from each of 3 eyewitnesses (Robert Chobert, Cynthia White and Albert Magilton) who stated that just moments after Jamal was subdued, they were asked to look at him as he lay inside the wagon. Each stated that they physically identified Mumia Abu-Jamal as the man they had just seen run across the street and shoot Officer Faulkner. At trial, these individuals again identified Jamal as the killer. Chobert stated that he never lost sight of Jamal from the moment he shot Faulkner until he was placed in the van. (N.T. 6/19/82, 210-213)
Physical Evidence
When apprehended Mumia Abu-Jamal was wearing an empty shoulder holster. A gun owned by Jamal and registered in his name was found at his side. At the 1982 trial, a store owner, Joseph Kohn, testified that he sold Jamal this gun on July 17, 1979 and produced a sales receipt with the gun's serial number and Jamal's signature on it to verify this fact. Mr. Kohn also stated that he sold Jamal a box of .38 caliber Federal brand +P ammunition. Kohn explained that +P is special high-velocity ammunition that "devastates" its target when it hits. He also noted that police are restricted from using +P ammunition for this reason.
The gun found on the ground next to Mumia Abu-Jamal was a five-shot .38 caliber Charter Arms Revolver. Jamal's gun contained five (5) spent casings. Four of these casings were manufactured by Federal Arms (the 5th was a Remington), which were unique in that their bullets had a hollow base. Ballistics tests verified that the bullet that killed Officer Faulkner had a hollow base (a feature exclusive to Federal brand ammunition) and was .38 caliber. Further, tests revealed that the fatal bullet had been fired from a gun barrel rifled with eight lands and grooves and a right-hand twist in its barrel. This is the identical pattern found in the barrel of Jamal's gun (the barrel of Officer Faulkner's own gun, for example, had only four lands and grooves).
As already noted, Jamal had his own ballistics expert at trial, George Fassnacht. Though Judge Sabo encouraged him to do so, Jamal did not call Fassnacht to testify in 1982. The obvious reason was that Fassnacht could not dispute any of the ballistic evidence. (N.T. 6/23/82, 6.136) Jamal tried to dispute this same information in his 1995 PCRA proceeding, at which Fassnacht again served as Jamal's ballistics expert. But when the time came for Fassnacht to testify, Jamal refused to let him look at the bullet. (N.T. 8/2/95, 150)
It was unequivocally determined the bullet removed from Jamal's torso had been fired from Officer Faulkner's service revolver.
Trace metal tests were performed on the jackets worn by both Mumia Abu-Jamal and Officer Faulkner. The tests confirmed that each man was shot from a distance of less than twelve inches.
Jamal's Bragging Confession to the Murder
In their testimony, several witnesses stated that Mr. Jamal was violently resisting police when he was brought into Thomas Jefferson Hospital. Three people, including two police officers and a black hospital security guard twice heard Jamal shout out, "I shot the Mother Fucker, and I hope the Mother Fucker dies." Two of these individuals, police officers Gary Bell and Gary Wakschul, each reported what they had heard two months after the incident. The third, security guard Priscilla Durham, reported hearing the same outburst to her supervisor the day after the shooting.
In 1982, the jury heard Jamal's attorney argue that the testimony confirming the confession was untrue, because the two police officers came forward so long after the shooting, and because Officer Wakschul had written in a report, that "the Negro male made no comments." However, the Defense had no explanation to counter the testimony of Priscilla Durham. Ms. Durham was a security guard who was employed by the hospital the morning of December 9, 1981. At the 1982 trial, Ms. Durham testified that she had reported what she had heard to her hospital supervisor, in writing, the day after the shooting.
Priscilla Durham testified:
Ms. Durham: At this time I didn't know [who he was]...all I did was hear him say, I shot the mother fucker and I hope the mother fucker dies.
6-24-82, T.R. 28
Ms. Durham was asked where Jamal was when he made his incriminating outburst. She replied, "He was at my feet." (6-24-82, T.R. 28). She reported this to her supervisors the next day:
Ms. Durham: I had already given a statement.
Mr. Jackson: To whom?
Ms. Durham: Jefferson [Hospital] investigators.
Mr. Jackson: When did you give that?
Ms. Durham: The next day.
N.T. 6-24-82, 47.
The report was produced in the courtroom, verifying her testimony.
JAMAL: His Own Worst Enemy
During the 1982 trial, the jury watched as Mumia Abu-Jamal, with loud outbursts and verbal threats, disrupted the trial proceedings on a daily basis. Initially, Jamal had agreed to be represented by his hand-picked attorney Anthony Jackson. He then suddenly preempted Jackson by deciding to represent himself. During jury selection, Jamal erratically changed direction and began demanding to have John Africa of MOVE -- a non-lawyer -- "represent" him.
The first day of trial (June 17, 1982) became a circus in which Jamal sought to case himself as ringmaster. He began by refusing to enter a plea. Then he refused to permit prosecutor Joe McGill to make his opening statement. Jamal then began what would become incessant demands to have John Africa "represent" him. McGill explained that Jamal could consult with Africa, or anyone he wanted: "I have no objection ... if John Africa or anybody else sits in those chairs back there, providing an opportunity for Mr. Jamal at recess or in between witnesses, to go and discuss matters and that would include discussing matters before the court (N.T. 6/17/82, 1.95). But of course, the Judge was not about to allow Africa to make a farce of the trial by pretending to be Jamal's lawyer. In an effort to quell Jamal's bizarre antics, McGill tried reverse psychology: "Lets see you stay here and represent yourself and don't try to chicken out." (N.T. 6/17/82, 1.60). Nothing worked. By the end of the day, Judge Sabo had to remove Jamal from self-representation, returning Jackson to the role of Jamal's full-fledged counsel. At Jamal's insistence, Jackson filed an emergency appeal to the state Supreme Court in order to block Judge Sabo's ruling. Instead, the Supreme Court approved the ruling the following day, and ordered the trial to proceed with Jackson as Jamal's lawyer.
That did nothing to stop Jamal's obstructionist tactics. Proclaiming that he was "following the directives of John Africa," Jamal began regularly disrupting the trial. On one occasion the Judge begged Jamal to sit down no less than eight times. Ultimately the Judge was forced to repeatedly remove Jamal from the courtroom, doing so on no less than thirteen occasions. Invariably, after each removal, the Judge permitted Jamal to return to the courtroom after asking Jamal if he would behave. Each time, Jamal would promise to do so. Each time, the promise would be broken.
It takes little imagination to discern what the jury must have made of Jamal's conduct. But that was only the part the jury could see. At the same time, Jamal was frantically undermining himself behind the scenes. He flatly refused to assist Anthony Jackson in his efforts to mount a defense. He refused to return to Jackson documents he had taken when he was representing himself. An important part of the defense strategy consisted of character witnesses, but Jamal refused to give Anthony Jackson the names of his character witnesses. Instead, Jamal contacted the witnesses himself, leaving Jackson unprepared to question them. At his sentencing hearing, against Jackson's advice, Jamal read a lengthy statement to the jury. In a rambling diatribe he mocked the jury's decision to convict, announcing that he was "innocent of the charges for which he had been convicted, no matter what you people think." It was clear, however, that Jamal considered himself "innocent," not because he had not murdered Officer Faulkner -- he never bothered to deny this in any of his outbursts -- but because the corrupt "system" had no right to hold him responsible: "This decision today proves neither my guilt nor my innocence. It proves merely that the system is finished. Babylon is falling. Long live MOVE. Long live John Africa." (N.T. 7/3/82, 16).
It was the evidence that sealed his fate, but Jamal did himself no favors with his bizarre courtroom antics. His intentionally disruptive actions and overtly political statements in the courtroom, which appeared to be intended to paint him the victim and gain sympathy from the jurors, served only to alienate them.
In his 1995 petition for release under Pennsylvania's Post Conviction Relief Act, Jamal claimed that his conviction was all Anthony Jackson's fault.
THE APPEAL PROCESS
In 1989, The Pennsylvania State Supreme Court denied Jamal's direct appeal for release, or a new trial.
In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review Jamal's direct appeal.
On October 29, 1998, following 3 years of PCRA appeals hearings, the seven Justices of the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court unanimously denied Jamal's second appeal. Frequently chastising Jamal's attorneys for misstating the record, The Supreme Court found many of their arguments to be ludicrous and absurd. Additionally, the State Supreme Court upheld the fairness of Mr. Jamal's 1982 trial, specifically supporting the actions taken by Judge Albert Sabo to maintain order in the courtroom.
Since Jamal's conviction in 1982, no less than eleven different judges, other than Judge Sabo, have reviewed Jamal's often convoluted claims of innocence, police coercion and court wrongdoing. Not one of these judges has found any merit to any of Jamal's claims. The United States Supreme Court declined to hear his case for the second time in 1999.
Jamal has now been in the Federal Habeas Corpus appeal process for over two years.
In 2001, Mumia Abu-Jamal fired his lawyers, Leonard Weinglass and Dan Williams. Labeling them "incompetent, unethical, sellouts", Jamal hired a new set of lawyers. These lawyers brought forward Arnold Beverly, who alleges that he and another man were hired to kill Officer Faulkner by the Mafia and corrupt Philadelphia Police officers. But Arnold Beverly was not a new witness. He had previously contacted Jamal's lawyers with his absurd story in 1999. Both Weinglass and Williams found Beverly's story to be patently ridiculous. In his book, Executing Justice, Dan Williams wrote, "I wasn't about to embarrass myself by running with such a patently outrageous story on the most visible death-penalty cases in the world." According to Williams, Jamal himself made the final decision not to bring Arnold Beverly forward as a witness. Jamal refutes this, and today he and his new lawyers are running with Beverly's absurd and factually impossible story. (For more information on the Arnold Beverly confession see Myth #17.)
For more information on the current status and history of Jamal's appeals, go to the Case History section.
MORE INFO, FAR MORE EXTENSIVE THAN COULD EVER BE PUT UP HERE, INCLUDING FACTS, EVIDENCE, TESTEMONIES, REBUTTLES OF THE PRO-MURDERER PROPAGANDA ETC:
Blue Block
Homepage:
http://www.danielfaulkner.com/
oh what a giveaway
19.05.2003 16:39
Supporters of Mumia are all 'communists', and police racism is a 'myth' used to hide the 'racial realities' that 'blacks are so disproportionately involved in crime'.
You're a white supremacist, aren't you?
kurious