Fundraising is a political task, & so this is an intensely political appeal. We are literally non-profit because we have no "stuff" to sell. All we "sell" is our commitment to free Mumia Abu-Jamal and all political prisoners. But we need money to fulfill the goals we've set to free Mumia.
First, we've been relying on other organizations to lend us their sound systems for rallies & marches, and sometimes we just can't make it happen. Not every activist who has an important story to tell is a street orator, so we are too often stuck in New York or Philly with dynamic speakers but no sound system to make them heard. Convinced that everything is possible, a trio of our most dedicated organizers went forth & actually purchased a portable sound system so we can demonstrate for Mumia anywhere we can travel. This has cost us $350, and it came out of a hard-working activist's rent money. We need your donation right now to put the rent money back in his pocket. Ten donations at only $35 will keep the wolf from the door.
Our big campaign to demand that the Justice Department grant Mumia a civil rights investigation is gathering tremendous momentum, with some really high-profile names, such as Ruby Dee, Cornel West, and Charles Rangel signing on, as well as thousands of folks from the U.S. and abroad. To go forward with lobbying in D.C., we are working to raise $2,000 to charter a bus.
We also want to be sure that folks who take a day off from work and family responsibilities to travel 9 hours and lobby will feel empowered to do it. We'd really like to offer free bus fare and meals to Mumia's lobbyists, who will be educating and raising the consciousness of our elected officials. We're asking for seed money to make sure that no one who is willing to go is excluded. Please give generously to make a real change in our nation and to help free Mumia Abu-Jamal!
You may donate online at www.freemumia.com or using the link below:
or send checks and money orders (payable to Free Mumia Coalition, NYC/IFCO) to us at our fiscal sponsor, IFCO [Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization]:
IFCO
402 West 145th Street
New York, NY 10031
Call 212-926-5757 with any fiscal questions or 212-330-8029 (Mumia Hotline) with any other questions.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
The Mumia Exception
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/05/05/18592858.php
http://www.phillyimc.org/en/mumia-exception
(Embedded video, interview at Philadelphia City Hall on May 1, 2008, featured at Abu-Jamal-News.com)
"The Mumia Exception"
by J. Patrick O'Connor
CrimeMagazine.com
Since his conviction in 1982 for the murder of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner, Mumia Abu-Jamal, through his numerous books, essays and radio commentaries, has become the face of the anti-death penalty movement in the United States and an international cause célèbre. Paris, for example, made him an honorary citizen in 2003, bestowing the honor for the first time since Pablo Picasso received it in 1971. The "Free Mumia" slogan is seen and heard around the world. Over the last 27 years he has become the most visible of the invisible 3,600 Death Row inmates in the United States.
The case of Mumia Abu-Jamal cries out for justice not because he is famous but because he is innocent. Kenneth Freeman, the street-vendor partner of Abu-Jamal's younger brother, Billy Cook, killed Officer Faulkner moments after Faulkner shot Abu-Jamal in the chest as he approached the scene where Faulkner had pulled over the car Cook was driving. When Faulkner began beating Cook with an 18-inch long flashlight, Abu-Jamal ran from his nearby taxi to come to his brother's aid. After Abu-Jamal was shot and collapsed to the street, Freeman emerged from Cook's car, wrestled Faulkner to the sidewalk and then shot him to death. Freeman fled the scene on foot. Numerous witnesses told police they saw one or more black men fleeing right after the officer was shot. A driver's license application found in Faulkner's shirt pocket led the police directly to Freeman's home within hours of the shooting.
But the police did not want Freeman for this killing, releasing him without him even having to call his attorney. The police, led by the corrupt Inspector Alfonzo Giordano who took charge of the crime scene within minutes of the shooting, wanted to pin Faulkner's death on the blacked-out, police-bashing radio reporter at the scene. Freeman they would deal with later, meting out their own brand of street justice in the dead of night.
Five days after Faulkner's death, the Center City newsstand where Freeman and Billy Cook operated a vending stand burned to the ground at about 3 a.m. Freeman told a Philadelphia Inquirer reporter hours after the arson that "there was no question in my mind that the police are behind this." The Inquirer also quoted a Center City police officer who was on patrol in the area that morning as saying, "It's entirely possible" that "certain sick members" of his department were responsible. "All I know is when I got to the station to start my shift at 7:30 this morning, the station house was filled with Cheshire grins." Although the "unsolved" arson bankrupted Freeman and Cook, a worse fate awaited Freeman.
On the night in 1985 when the police infamously firebombed the MOVE home and burned down 60 other row houses in the process, incinerating 11 MOVE members including five children, Freeman's dead body would be found nude and gagged in an empty lot, his hands handcuffed behind his back. There would be no police investigation into this obvious murder: the coroner listed his cause of death as a heart attack. Freeman was 31.
Abu-Jamal had been well known to local police since he joined the Philly chapter of the Black Panther Party at age 15. The next year he was named "lieutenant of information," an appointment the Inquirer ran on its front page, picturing the young radical at Panther headquarters. Even though the chapter would soon dissolve, both the police and the FBI continued to monitor Abu-Jamal when he left Philadelphia to attend Goddard College in Vermont and on his return to Philadelphia to take up his radio career. As his career took wing, landing him a high-profile job at Philadelphia's public radio station, that scrutiny intensified due to his overtly sympathetic coverage of the radical counter-culture group MOVE. Throughout the 1970s and well into the 1980s, police confrontations with MOVE were brutal displays of civic discord and police abuse that culminated in the 1985 firebombing.
Abu-Jamal's case has been politically charged from the beginning. By the time he was arrested for the murder of Officer Faulkner, he was a marked man to the police for his Black Panther Party association and his favorable reporting of MOVE. Inspector Giordano, who detested both Abu-Jamal and MOVE, would set the framing of Abu-Jamal in motion by falsely claiming that Abu-Jamal had told him in the paddy wagon that he had killed Faulkner. (Giordano would not be called by the prosecution to reiterate his fabrication at Abu-Jamal's trial. Instead, on the first business day following Abu-Jamal's sentencing, Giordano would be "relieved" of his duties by the police department on what would prove to be well-founded "suspicions of corruption." An FBI probe of rank corruption within the Philadelphia Police Department - the largest ever conducted by the U.S. Justice Department of a police force - would lead to Giordano's conviction four years later. The FBI investigation would ensnare numerous other high-ranking Philadelphia police officials and officers, many of them involved in Abu-Jamal's arrest and trial. Deputy Police Commissioner James Martin, who was in charge of all major investigations, including Faulkner's death, was the ringleader of a vast extortion enterprise operating in City Center.)
The trial of Abu-Jamal was a monumental miscarriage of justice from beginning to end, representing an extreme case of prosecutorial abuse and judicial bias. A pamphlet published by Amnesty International in 2000 stated it had "determined that numerous aspects of Mumia Abu-Jamal's case clearly failed to meet minimum standards safeguarding the fairness of legal proceedings."
The trial judge, Common Pleas Court Judge Albert F. Sabo, presided at more trials that resulted in the defendants receiving the death penalty than any judge in the nation. Of the 31 so sentenced, five won reversals on appeal, an indication of extreme judicial bias. The Inquirer called him "a defendant's worst nightmare," a prominent defense attorney referred to him as "a prosecutor in robes." A former court stenographer said in an affidavit in 2001 that during Abu-Jamal's trial she overheard Sabo tell someone at the courthouse, "Yeah, and I am going to help them fry the nigger."
During the third day of jury selection, Sabo stripped Abu-Jamal of his right to represent himself and interview potential jurors despite the fact that the Inquirer reported Abu-Jamal was "intent and business like" in his questioning. On the second day of the trial, Sabo removed Abu-Jamal from the courtroom for insisting that MOVE founder John Africa replace his court appointed backup counsel, Anthony Jackson. In turn, Sabo appointed Jackson to represent Abu-Jamal. This would put to rout the possibility of a fair trial.
Abu-Jamal's first major appeal issue developed during jury selection when the prosecutor, Assistant D.A. Joseph McGill, used 10 or 11 of the 15 peremptory challenges he exercised to keep otherwise qualified blacks from sitting on this death-penalty-vetted jury. In a city with more than a 40 percent black population at the time, Abu-Jamal's jury ended up with only two blacks. In 1986 - four years after Abu-Jamal's trial - the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Batson v. Kentucky that it was unconstitutional for a prosecutor to exclude potential jurors on the basis of race. The ruling was retroactive.
The second major constitutional claim that would arise occurred at the end of the guilt phase of the trial when the prosecutor referenced the appeal process in his summation to the jury. He told the jury that if they found Abu-Jamal guilty of murder in the first degree that "there would be appeal after appeal and perhaps there could be a reversal of the case, or whatever, so that may not be final."
Although Officer Faulkner had been killed by Kenneth Freeman, the prosecution mounted its evidentiary case against Abu-Jamal on the perjured testimony of a prostitute informant and a cab driver with a suspended license for two DUIs who was on probation for throwing a Molotov cocktail into a school yard during a school day. Both of these witnesses had been handpicked by Giordano at the crime scene.
"The Mumia Exception"
As Amnesty International established in its 2000 pamphlet entitled "The Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal: A Life in the Balance," his tortuous appeal process has been fraught with "judicial machinations." Claims that won the day in other cases were repeatedly denied him.
In 1989, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court turned down his first appeal even though one of his claims was almost identical to one that had persuaded the same court to grant Lawrence Baker a new trial in 1986. In that case, Commonwealth v. Baker, the court overturned Baker's death sentence for first-degree murder on the grounds that the prosecutor improperly referenced the lengthy appeal process afforded those sentenced to death. That prosecutor - Joseph McGill - was the same prosecutor who used similar - almost verbatim - language in his summation during both the guilt and sentencing phases of Mumia's trial. The judge who failed to strike the language in the Baker case was the same judge who presided at Mumia's trial, Common Pleas Court Judge Albert F. Sabo.
The State Supreme Court ruled in Baker that the use of such language "minimize[ed] the jury's sense of responsibility for a verdict of death." When Abu-Jamal's appeal included the very same issue, the court reversed its own precedent in the matter, denying the claim in a shocking unanimous decision.
A year later, in Commonwealth v. Beasley, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reinstated the death sentence of Leslie Beasley, but exerted its supervisory power to adopt a "per se rule precluding all remarks about the appellate process in all future trials." This rule not only reinstated the Baker precedent but it ordered all prosecutors in the state to refrain once and for all from referencing the appellate process in summations to the jury. The court could have made this new rule retroactive to Mumia's case, but did not.
As Amnesty International declared in its pamphlet about the case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's judicial scheming leave "the disturbing impression that the court invented a new standard of procedure to apply to one case only: that of Mumia Abu-Jamal," Temple University journalism professor Linn Washington aptly dubs this and subsequent court decisions denying Mumia a new trial "the Mumia exception."
Abu-Jamal's Post-Conviction Relief Act hearing in 1995 was doomed from the beginning when Judge Sabo - the original trial judge - would not recuse himself from the case and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would not remove him for bias.
Abu-Jamal's federal habeas corpus appeal - decided by Federal District Judge William Yohn in 2001 - should have resulted in at least an evidentiary hearing on Abu-Jamal's Batson claim that the prosecutor unconstitutionally purged blacks from the jury by using peremptory strikes to exclude 10 or 11 otherwise qualified black jurors from being empanelled. Abu-Jamal's attorneys had included a study conducted by Professor David Baldus that documented the systematic use of peremptory challenges to exclude blacks by Prosecutor McGill in the six death-penalty cases he prosecuted in Common Pleas Court in Philadelphia. Abu-Jamal's trial was one of the six trials studied by Baldus. Judge Yohn barred the study on the erroneous grounds that the study was not from a relevant time period when, in fact, it was completely relevant. Judge Yohn's error was egregious and could have been easily avoided if he had held one evidentiary hearing on that defense claim. But during the two years that Judge Yohn considered Abu-Jamal's habeas appeal, he held no hearings.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit should have corrected that district court mistake by remanding Abu-Jamal's case back to Judge Yohn to hold the evidentiary hearing on the Batson claim, but in another example of the "Mumia exception," the court instead continued the long and tortured denial of Mumia's right to a fair trial. In a 2 to 1 decision released on March 27, 2008 that reeked of politics and racism, the court ruled that Abu-Jamal had failed to meet his burden in providing a prima facie case. He failed, the majority wrote, because his attorneys were unable to establish the racial composition of the entire jury pool.
In the decision written by Chief Judge Anthony Scirica, the court stated that "Abu-Jamal had the opportunity to develop this evidence at the PCRA evidentiary hearing, but failed to do so. There may be instances where a prima facie case can be made without evidence of the strike rate and exclusion rate. But, in this case [i.e., "the Mumia exception" is in play], we cannot find the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's ruling [denying the Batson claim] unreasonable based on this incomplete record."
In a nutshell, the majority denied Mumia's Batson claim on a technicality of its own invention, not on its merits. It also broke with the sacrosanct stare decisis doctrine - the principle that the precedent decisions are to be followed by the courts - by ignoring its own previous opposite ruling in the Holloway v. Horn case of 2004 and the Brinson v. Vaughn case of 2005. It is a general maxim that when a point has been settled by decision, it forms a precedent which is not afterwards to be departed from. In a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in 1989 in a case entitled United States v. Washington, the decision stated that an appeal court's panel is "bound by decisions of prior panels unless an en banc decision, Supreme Court decision, or subsequent legislation undermines those decisions." None of those variables were in play when the Third Circuit Court majority ruled against Mumia's Batson claim.
Judge Thomas Ambro's dissent was sharp: "I do not agree with them [the majority] that Mumia Abu-Jamal fails to meet the low bar for making a prima facie case under Batson. In holding otherwise, they raise the standard necessary to make out a prima facie case beyond what Batson calls for."
In other words, the majority, in this case alone, has upped the ante required for making a Batson claim beyond what the U.S. Supreme Court stipulated. When ruling in Batson in 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court did not require that the racial composition of the entire jury pool be known before a Batson claim may be raised. The high court ruled that a defendant must show only "an inference" of prosecutorial discrimination in purging potential jurors. Prosecutor McGill's using 10 or 11 of the 15 peremptory strikes he deployed is just such an inference - and an extremely strong one. McGill's strike rate of over 66 percent against potential black jurors is in itself prima facie evidence of race discrimination. Prima facie is a Latin term meaning "at first view," meaning the evidence being presented is presumed to be true unless disproved.
In commenting on Holloway v. Horn, a Batson-type case with striking similarities to Abu-Jamal's claim, Judge Ambro - the lone Democrat-appointed judge on the three judge panel - demonstrated just how disingenuous the panel's ruling against Abu-Jamal's Batson claim was. "In Holloway, Judge Ambro wrote in his 41-page dissent, "we emphasized that 'requiring the presentation of [a record detailing the race of the venire] simply to move past the first state - the prima facie stage - in the Batson analysis places an undue burden upon the defendant.' There we found the strike rate - 11 of 12 peremptory strikes against black persons - satisfied the prima facie burden." In Holloway, the Third Circuit ruled that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision denying Holloway's Batson claim was "contrary to" and an "unreasonable application" of the Batson standard.
In fact, in rendering both its Holloway and Brinson decision, the Third Circuit specifically rejected the requirement that a petitioner develop a complete record of the jury pool. In making its ruling in Abu-Jamal's appeal, it reversed itself to make the pretext of an incomplete jury record his fatal misstep. Basing its ruling against Abu-Jamal's Batson claim on this invented pretext demonstrated how desperate the majority was to block Abu-Jamal's Batson claim. What the majority was implying was that Abu-Jamal's jury pool may well have consisted of 60 or 70 percent black people and that therefore the prosecutor's using 66 percent of his strikes to oust potential black jurors was statistically normal and did not create a prima facie case of discrimination. This hypothesis is, of course, absurd on its face. Blacks have been underrepresented on Philadelphia juries for years - and remain so today. What was likely was that the jury pool at Abu-Jamal's trial was at least 70 percent white.
The Third Circuit - if it had followed its own precedent - would have found the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's ruling denying Abu-Jamal's Batson claim "contrary to" and an "unreasonable application" of the Batson standard and remanded the case back to Federal District Court Judge Yohn to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the prosecutor's reasons for excluding the 10 potential black jurors he struck. If that hearing satisfied Judge Yohn that all of the prosecutor's reasons for striking potential black jurors were race neutral, the Batson claim would fail. If, conversely, that hearing revealed racial discrimination on the part of the prosecutor during jury selection - even if only concerning one potential juror - Judge Yohn would have been compelled to order a new trial for Abu-Jamal.
Abu-Jamal's final opportunity for judicial relief was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in November of 2008 in the form of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. On February 4, the high court docketed and accepted that filing. According to Abu-Jamal's lead attorney, Robert Bryan of San Francisco, "The central issue in this case is racism in jury selection. The prosecution systematically removed people from sitting on the trial jury purely because of the color of their skin, that is, being black."
For at least two compelling reasons, it appeared that the U.S. Supreme Court would grant Abu-Jamal's petition. In its last term, the high court expanded its 1986 Batson ruling in its Synder v. Maryland decision to warrant a new trial if a minority defendant could show the inference of racial bias in the prosecutor's peremptory exclusion of one juror. Under Batson, the defense needed to show an inference - i.e., a pattern - of racial bias in the overall jury selection process. Ironically, the Supreme Court's 7-2 decision strengthening and expanding Batson's reach was written by Justice Samuel Alito, most recently of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
The second reason was that the Third Circuit's ruling denying Abu-Jamal's Batson claim undermined both the Batson and Synder decisions by placing new restrictions on a defendant's ability to file a Batson claim. The Third Circuit ruling against Abu-Jamal had the effect of creating new law by tampering with a long-established Supreme Court precedent.
As a result, there seemed to be something more than a remote possibility that the Supreme Court would agree to grant Abu-Jamal's writ.
A Writ of Certiorari is a decision by the Supreme Court to hear an appeal from a lower court. Supreme Court justices rarely give a reason why they accept or deny Cert. Although all nine justices are involved in considering Cert Petitions, it takes only four justices to grant a Writ of Certiorari, even if five justices are against it. This is known as "the rule of four."
Despite needing only four votes to have his Batson claim argued, the Supreme Court on April 6, 2009 tersely denied Abu-Jamal's request for a writ. The so-called "liberal block" of Justices Stevens, Ginsberg, Souter, and Breyer disintegrated, yielding to the awesome political power of the "Mumia exception."
Abu-Jamal - who turned 55 on April 24, 2009 - will, barring the most unlikely intervention by a future governor of Pennsylvania, spend the rest of his life in prison for a crime he did not commit.
J. Patrick O'Connor is the editor of Crime Magazine (http://www.crimemagazine.com) and the author of The Framing of Mumia Abu-Jamal, published by Lawrence Hill Books in 2008.
http://www.phillyimc.org/en/mumia-exception
(Embedded video, interview at Philadelphia City Hall on May 1, 2008, featured at Abu-Jamal-News.com)
"The Mumia Exception"
by J. Patrick O'Connor
CrimeMagazine.com
Since his conviction in 1982 for the murder of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner, Mumia Abu-Jamal, through his numerous books, essays and radio commentaries, has become the face of the anti-death penalty movement in the United States and an international cause célèbre. Paris, for example, made him an honorary citizen in 2003, bestowing the honor for the first time since Pablo Picasso received it in 1971. The "Free Mumia" slogan is seen and heard around the world. Over the last 27 years he has become the most visible of the invisible 3,600 Death Row inmates in the United States.
The case of Mumia Abu-Jamal cries out for justice not because he is famous but because he is innocent. Kenneth Freeman, the street-vendor partner of Abu-Jamal's younger brother, Billy Cook, killed Officer Faulkner moments after Faulkner shot Abu-Jamal in the chest as he approached the scene where Faulkner had pulled over the car Cook was driving. When Faulkner began beating Cook with an 18-inch long flashlight, Abu-Jamal ran from his nearby taxi to come to his brother's aid. After Abu-Jamal was shot and collapsed to the street, Freeman emerged from Cook's car, wrestled Faulkner to the sidewalk and then shot him to death. Freeman fled the scene on foot. Numerous witnesses told police they saw one or more black men fleeing right after the officer was shot. A driver's license application found in Faulkner's shirt pocket led the police directly to Freeman's home within hours of the shooting.
But the police did not want Freeman for this killing, releasing him without him even having to call his attorney. The police, led by the corrupt Inspector Alfonzo Giordano who took charge of the crime scene within minutes of the shooting, wanted to pin Faulkner's death on the blacked-out, police-bashing radio reporter at the scene. Freeman they would deal with later, meting out their own brand of street justice in the dead of night.
Five days after Faulkner's death, the Center City newsstand where Freeman and Billy Cook operated a vending stand burned to the ground at about 3 a.m. Freeman told a Philadelphia Inquirer reporter hours after the arson that "there was no question in my mind that the police are behind this." The Inquirer also quoted a Center City police officer who was on patrol in the area that morning as saying, "It's entirely possible" that "certain sick members" of his department were responsible. "All I know is when I got to the station to start my shift at 7:30 this morning, the station house was filled with Cheshire grins." Although the "unsolved" arson bankrupted Freeman and Cook, a worse fate awaited Freeman.
On the night in 1985 when the police infamously firebombed the MOVE home and burned down 60 other row houses in the process, incinerating 11 MOVE members including five children, Freeman's dead body would be found nude and gagged in an empty lot, his hands handcuffed behind his back. There would be no police investigation into this obvious murder: the coroner listed his cause of death as a heart attack. Freeman was 31.
Abu-Jamal had been well known to local police since he joined the Philly chapter of the Black Panther Party at age 15. The next year he was named "lieutenant of information," an appointment the Inquirer ran on its front page, picturing the young radical at Panther headquarters. Even though the chapter would soon dissolve, both the police and the FBI continued to monitor Abu-Jamal when he left Philadelphia to attend Goddard College in Vermont and on his return to Philadelphia to take up his radio career. As his career took wing, landing him a high-profile job at Philadelphia's public radio station, that scrutiny intensified due to his overtly sympathetic coverage of the radical counter-culture group MOVE. Throughout the 1970s and well into the 1980s, police confrontations with MOVE were brutal displays of civic discord and police abuse that culminated in the 1985 firebombing.
Abu-Jamal's case has been politically charged from the beginning. By the time he was arrested for the murder of Officer Faulkner, he was a marked man to the police for his Black Panther Party association and his favorable reporting of MOVE. Inspector Giordano, who detested both Abu-Jamal and MOVE, would set the framing of Abu-Jamal in motion by falsely claiming that Abu-Jamal had told him in the paddy wagon that he had killed Faulkner. (Giordano would not be called by the prosecution to reiterate his fabrication at Abu-Jamal's trial. Instead, on the first business day following Abu-Jamal's sentencing, Giordano would be "relieved" of his duties by the police department on what would prove to be well-founded "suspicions of corruption." An FBI probe of rank corruption within the Philadelphia Police Department - the largest ever conducted by the U.S. Justice Department of a police force - would lead to Giordano's conviction four years later. The FBI investigation would ensnare numerous other high-ranking Philadelphia police officials and officers, many of them involved in Abu-Jamal's arrest and trial. Deputy Police Commissioner James Martin, who was in charge of all major investigations, including Faulkner's death, was the ringleader of a vast extortion enterprise operating in City Center.)
The trial of Abu-Jamal was a monumental miscarriage of justice from beginning to end, representing an extreme case of prosecutorial abuse and judicial bias. A pamphlet published by Amnesty International in 2000 stated it had "determined that numerous aspects of Mumia Abu-Jamal's case clearly failed to meet minimum standards safeguarding the fairness of legal proceedings."
The trial judge, Common Pleas Court Judge Albert F. Sabo, presided at more trials that resulted in the defendants receiving the death penalty than any judge in the nation. Of the 31 so sentenced, five won reversals on appeal, an indication of extreme judicial bias. The Inquirer called him "a defendant's worst nightmare," a prominent defense attorney referred to him as "a prosecutor in robes." A former court stenographer said in an affidavit in 2001 that during Abu-Jamal's trial she overheard Sabo tell someone at the courthouse, "Yeah, and I am going to help them fry the nigger."
During the third day of jury selection, Sabo stripped Abu-Jamal of his right to represent himself and interview potential jurors despite the fact that the Inquirer reported Abu-Jamal was "intent and business like" in his questioning. On the second day of the trial, Sabo removed Abu-Jamal from the courtroom for insisting that MOVE founder John Africa replace his court appointed backup counsel, Anthony Jackson. In turn, Sabo appointed Jackson to represent Abu-Jamal. This would put to rout the possibility of a fair trial.
Abu-Jamal's first major appeal issue developed during jury selection when the prosecutor, Assistant D.A. Joseph McGill, used 10 or 11 of the 15 peremptory challenges he exercised to keep otherwise qualified blacks from sitting on this death-penalty-vetted jury. In a city with more than a 40 percent black population at the time, Abu-Jamal's jury ended up with only two blacks. In 1986 - four years after Abu-Jamal's trial - the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Batson v. Kentucky that it was unconstitutional for a prosecutor to exclude potential jurors on the basis of race. The ruling was retroactive.
The second major constitutional claim that would arise occurred at the end of the guilt phase of the trial when the prosecutor referenced the appeal process in his summation to the jury. He told the jury that if they found Abu-Jamal guilty of murder in the first degree that "there would be appeal after appeal and perhaps there could be a reversal of the case, or whatever, so that may not be final."
Although Officer Faulkner had been killed by Kenneth Freeman, the prosecution mounted its evidentiary case against Abu-Jamal on the perjured testimony of a prostitute informant and a cab driver with a suspended license for two DUIs who was on probation for throwing a Molotov cocktail into a school yard during a school day. Both of these witnesses had been handpicked by Giordano at the crime scene.
"The Mumia Exception"
As Amnesty International established in its 2000 pamphlet entitled "The Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal: A Life in the Balance," his tortuous appeal process has been fraught with "judicial machinations." Claims that won the day in other cases were repeatedly denied him.
In 1989, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court turned down his first appeal even though one of his claims was almost identical to one that had persuaded the same court to grant Lawrence Baker a new trial in 1986. In that case, Commonwealth v. Baker, the court overturned Baker's death sentence for first-degree murder on the grounds that the prosecutor improperly referenced the lengthy appeal process afforded those sentenced to death. That prosecutor - Joseph McGill - was the same prosecutor who used similar - almost verbatim - language in his summation during both the guilt and sentencing phases of Mumia's trial. The judge who failed to strike the language in the Baker case was the same judge who presided at Mumia's trial, Common Pleas Court Judge Albert F. Sabo.
The State Supreme Court ruled in Baker that the use of such language "minimize[ed] the jury's sense of responsibility for a verdict of death." When Abu-Jamal's appeal included the very same issue, the court reversed its own precedent in the matter, denying the claim in a shocking unanimous decision.
A year later, in Commonwealth v. Beasley, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reinstated the death sentence of Leslie Beasley, but exerted its supervisory power to adopt a "per se rule precluding all remarks about the appellate process in all future trials." This rule not only reinstated the Baker precedent but it ordered all prosecutors in the state to refrain once and for all from referencing the appellate process in summations to the jury. The court could have made this new rule retroactive to Mumia's case, but did not.
As Amnesty International declared in its pamphlet about the case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's judicial scheming leave "the disturbing impression that the court invented a new standard of procedure to apply to one case only: that of Mumia Abu-Jamal," Temple University journalism professor Linn Washington aptly dubs this and subsequent court decisions denying Mumia a new trial "the Mumia exception."
Abu-Jamal's Post-Conviction Relief Act hearing in 1995 was doomed from the beginning when Judge Sabo - the original trial judge - would not recuse himself from the case and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would not remove him for bias.
Abu-Jamal's federal habeas corpus appeal - decided by Federal District Judge William Yohn in 2001 - should have resulted in at least an evidentiary hearing on Abu-Jamal's Batson claim that the prosecutor unconstitutionally purged blacks from the jury by using peremptory strikes to exclude 10 or 11 otherwise qualified black jurors from being empanelled. Abu-Jamal's attorneys had included a study conducted by Professor David Baldus that documented the systematic use of peremptory challenges to exclude blacks by Prosecutor McGill in the six death-penalty cases he prosecuted in Common Pleas Court in Philadelphia. Abu-Jamal's trial was one of the six trials studied by Baldus. Judge Yohn barred the study on the erroneous grounds that the study was not from a relevant time period when, in fact, it was completely relevant. Judge Yohn's error was egregious and could have been easily avoided if he had held one evidentiary hearing on that defense claim. But during the two years that Judge Yohn considered Abu-Jamal's habeas appeal, he held no hearings.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit should have corrected that district court mistake by remanding Abu-Jamal's case back to Judge Yohn to hold the evidentiary hearing on the Batson claim, but in another example of the "Mumia exception," the court instead continued the long and tortured denial of Mumia's right to a fair trial. In a 2 to 1 decision released on March 27, 2008 that reeked of politics and racism, the court ruled that Abu-Jamal had failed to meet his burden in providing a prima facie case. He failed, the majority wrote, because his attorneys were unable to establish the racial composition of the entire jury pool.
In the decision written by Chief Judge Anthony Scirica, the court stated that "Abu-Jamal had the opportunity to develop this evidence at the PCRA evidentiary hearing, but failed to do so. There may be instances where a prima facie case can be made without evidence of the strike rate and exclusion rate. But, in this case [i.e., "the Mumia exception" is in play], we cannot find the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's ruling [denying the Batson claim] unreasonable based on this incomplete record."
In a nutshell, the majority denied Mumia's Batson claim on a technicality of its own invention, not on its merits. It also broke with the sacrosanct stare decisis doctrine - the principle that the precedent decisions are to be followed by the courts - by ignoring its own previous opposite ruling in the Holloway v. Horn case of 2004 and the Brinson v. Vaughn case of 2005. It is a general maxim that when a point has been settled by decision, it forms a precedent which is not afterwards to be departed from. In a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in 1989 in a case entitled United States v. Washington, the decision stated that an appeal court's panel is "bound by decisions of prior panels unless an en banc decision, Supreme Court decision, or subsequent legislation undermines those decisions." None of those variables were in play when the Third Circuit Court majority ruled against Mumia's Batson claim.
Judge Thomas Ambro's dissent was sharp: "I do not agree with them [the majority] that Mumia Abu-Jamal fails to meet the low bar for making a prima facie case under Batson. In holding otherwise, they raise the standard necessary to make out a prima facie case beyond what Batson calls for."
In other words, the majority, in this case alone, has upped the ante required for making a Batson claim beyond what the U.S. Supreme Court stipulated. When ruling in Batson in 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court did not require that the racial composition of the entire jury pool be known before a Batson claim may be raised. The high court ruled that a defendant must show only "an inference" of prosecutorial discrimination in purging potential jurors. Prosecutor McGill's using 10 or 11 of the 15 peremptory strikes he deployed is just such an inference - and an extremely strong one. McGill's strike rate of over 66 percent against potential black jurors is in itself prima facie evidence of race discrimination. Prima facie is a Latin term meaning "at first view," meaning the evidence being presented is presumed to be true unless disproved.
In commenting on Holloway v. Horn, a Batson-type case with striking similarities to Abu-Jamal's claim, Judge Ambro - the lone Democrat-appointed judge on the three judge panel - demonstrated just how disingenuous the panel's ruling against Abu-Jamal's Batson claim was. "In Holloway, Judge Ambro wrote in his 41-page dissent, "we emphasized that 'requiring the presentation of [a record detailing the race of the venire] simply to move past the first state - the prima facie stage - in the Batson analysis places an undue burden upon the defendant.' There we found the strike rate - 11 of 12 peremptory strikes against black persons - satisfied the prima facie burden." In Holloway, the Third Circuit ruled that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision denying Holloway's Batson claim was "contrary to" and an "unreasonable application" of the Batson standard.
In fact, in rendering both its Holloway and Brinson decision, the Third Circuit specifically rejected the requirement that a petitioner develop a complete record of the jury pool. In making its ruling in Abu-Jamal's appeal, it reversed itself to make the pretext of an incomplete jury record his fatal misstep. Basing its ruling against Abu-Jamal's Batson claim on this invented pretext demonstrated how desperate the majority was to block Abu-Jamal's Batson claim. What the majority was implying was that Abu-Jamal's jury pool may well have consisted of 60 or 70 percent black people and that therefore the prosecutor's using 66 percent of his strikes to oust potential black jurors was statistically normal and did not create a prima facie case of discrimination. This hypothesis is, of course, absurd on its face. Blacks have been underrepresented on Philadelphia juries for years - and remain so today. What was likely was that the jury pool at Abu-Jamal's trial was at least 70 percent white.
The Third Circuit - if it had followed its own precedent - would have found the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's ruling denying Abu-Jamal's Batson claim "contrary to" and an "unreasonable application" of the Batson standard and remanded the case back to Federal District Court Judge Yohn to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the prosecutor's reasons for excluding the 10 potential black jurors he struck. If that hearing satisfied Judge Yohn that all of the prosecutor's reasons for striking potential black jurors were race neutral, the Batson claim would fail. If, conversely, that hearing revealed racial discrimination on the part of the prosecutor during jury selection - even if only concerning one potential juror - Judge Yohn would have been compelled to order a new trial for Abu-Jamal.
Abu-Jamal's final opportunity for judicial relief was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in November of 2008 in the form of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. On February 4, the high court docketed and accepted that filing. According to Abu-Jamal's lead attorney, Robert Bryan of San Francisco, "The central issue in this case is racism in jury selection. The prosecution systematically removed people from sitting on the trial jury purely because of the color of their skin, that is, being black."
For at least two compelling reasons, it appeared that the U.S. Supreme Court would grant Abu-Jamal's petition. In its last term, the high court expanded its 1986 Batson ruling in its Synder v. Maryland decision to warrant a new trial if a minority defendant could show the inference of racial bias in the prosecutor's peremptory exclusion of one juror. Under Batson, the defense needed to show an inference - i.e., a pattern - of racial bias in the overall jury selection process. Ironically, the Supreme Court's 7-2 decision strengthening and expanding Batson's reach was written by Justice Samuel Alito, most recently of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
The second reason was that the Third Circuit's ruling denying Abu-Jamal's Batson claim undermined both the Batson and Synder decisions by placing new restrictions on a defendant's ability to file a Batson claim. The Third Circuit ruling against Abu-Jamal had the effect of creating new law by tampering with a long-established Supreme Court precedent.
As a result, there seemed to be something more than a remote possibility that the Supreme Court would agree to grant Abu-Jamal's writ.
A Writ of Certiorari is a decision by the Supreme Court to hear an appeal from a lower court. Supreme Court justices rarely give a reason why they accept or deny Cert. Although all nine justices are involved in considering Cert Petitions, it takes only four justices to grant a Writ of Certiorari, even if five justices are against it. This is known as "the rule of four."
Despite needing only four votes to have his Batson claim argued, the Supreme Court on April 6, 2009 tersely denied Abu-Jamal's request for a writ. The so-called "liberal block" of Justices Stevens, Ginsberg, Souter, and Breyer disintegrated, yielding to the awesome political power of the "Mumia exception."
Abu-Jamal - who turned 55 on April 24, 2009 - will, barring the most unlikely intervention by a future governor of Pennsylvania, spend the rest of his life in prison for a crime he did not commit.
J. Patrick O'Connor is the editor of Crime Magazine (http://www.crimemagazine.com) and the author of The Framing of Mumia Abu-Jamal, published by Lawrence Hill Books in 2008.
Monday, May 04, 2009
Prisoners Defending Prisoners: Review of new book by Mumia Abu-Jamal
From: Hans Bennett
http://www.phillyimc.org/en/prisoners-defending-prisoners-review-new-book-mumia-abu-jamal
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/04/30/18592062.php
Prisoners Defending Prisoners: Review of new book by Mumia Abu-Jamal
by Carolina Saldaña
(Spanish language version below)
“My only wish is to tell a story that has never been told before,” says Mumia Abu-Jamal of his new book Jailhouse Lawyers: Prisoners Defending Prisoners v. the U.S.A., City Lights Books, 2009.
Mumia Abu-Jamal’s sixth book written from death row is coming out at the very time that the Supreme Court of the United States has slammed the door in his face and the campaign to execute him has been renewed. The book was presented on April 24 in Philadelphia, New York, Oakland, Detroit, Boston, Houston, Portland, Los Ángeles, Seattle, Olympia, Baltimore, and Washington D.C., to celebrate his birthday and open a new stage in the battle for his life and freedom.
(See Universal African Dance & Drum Ensemble at Philadelphia event:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fyKTmH4A8E)
He tells us that there are tens of thousands of jailhouse lawyers in the prisons of the United States. Little known, if they are known at all, outside prison walls, they are men and women who handle their own cases, defend other prisoners, or file suits to bring about changes in prison conditions. With insight, respect, empathy, and humor, Mumia brings us the words and experiences of around thirty of them, some of whom he has known personally in the prisons of Pennsylvania and others who have corresponded with him or responded to his surveys. Most of them fight their cases in unfamiliar territory because they didn’t go to law school before they ended up in prison; they’ve learned the law on their own, usually with the help of other, more experienced prisoners.
“They've not forgotten how to fight,” says Mumia. “They've not forgotten how to resist. They've not forgotten how to help others, often the most helpless around them. And they've not forgotten how to win.... Some of these people have, quite literally, saved people's lives by their work. Others have changed the rules of the game.”
To thank them for their services in protecting the Constitution, they are punished more harshly than any other single group of prisoners.
In this book, we get to know Steve Evans, who learned the law by himself and taught many other prisoners (with the exception of snitches and baby rapers) how to handle their own cases. His pupil Warren Henderson had to learn to read before he could learn the law, but he developed such a love of reading that he stole hundreds of books with the dream of setting up a library for the kids in the ‘hood when he got out of prison, and went on to successfully defend himself in court. Midge DeLuca, who had cancer when she went to jail decided to help other women who needed medical care after reading a line from her favorite poet Audre Lorde, “only our silences will hurt us.”
We also meet quite a few rebels, revolutionaries, and political prisoners, such as the MOVE members and sympathizers who dramatically defied the authority of the courts in a long series of trials, often with unorthodox tactics; Rashaan Brooks-Bey, who organized strikes and other actions for prisoners’ rights, and along with his co-plaintiffs Russell Maroon Shoatz, Robert Joyner, and Kareem Howard, openly confronted the judge and demanded that the police be jailed; Martin Sostre, the legendary organizer of the Afro-Asian Book Store in Buffalo, NY, who won many suits and influenced many of his fellow prisoners; Iron Thunderhorse, long-time prisoners’ rights organizer, now legally blind; and Ed Mead, originally a social prisoner turned prisoners’ rights activist, and later member of the George Jackson Brigade and then co-founder of Prison Legal News.
Scorned by judges and district attorneys and faced with a serious lack of resources and public apathy, jailhouse lawyers often lose their cases, but they have scored some impressive wins.
-- In Pennsylvania, Richard Mayberry’s battles to represent himself began in the mid-‘60s, and in spite of being sent to the hole many times, he finally eliminated some of the major obstacles. He also won a class-action suit in 1978 that brought drastic changes in the prisons of several states in the areas of health, overcrowding, and punishments such as the “glass cages.”
-- In 1971, David Ruiz filed suit against the Texas prison system, which was run like a slave plantation, resulting in far-reaching reforms ordered by Judge William Wayne Justice.
-- In Pennsylvania, at the beginning of the ‘80s, a class action suit filed by Rashaan Brooks-Bey resulted in the closure of a repressive unit at the Pittsburgh prison. The prisoners also won two hours of outdoor exercise instead of fifteen minutes, laundry service, covered food trays, and an end to four strip searches every time they had a visitor.
-- In California, appeals filed by Jane Dorotik have led to the freedom of a good number of women falsely imprisoned at Chowchilla. Her work is underscored in a chapter dedicated to the work of several women jailhouse lawyers at a time when there has been a tremendous increase in the women’s prison population ––300% in the last few years.
-- Barry “Running Bear” Gibbs achieved the revocation of his own death sentence as well as those of two other prisoners. He remembers how he felt when one of them yelled out the good news. Says Running Bear: “Saving someone’s life via pen and paper is a rewarding and unforgettable experience.”
-- The shameful sentencing of 9 MOVE members to prison terms of 30-100 years in 1978 was followed by an astounding victory for the organization in 1981, when Mo and John Africa successfully defended themselves on arms and explosives charges. Their unusual tactics included summoning the 9 MOVE prisoners to testify about the aims of their struggle, the good character of John Africa, and the treason of the state’s witnesses, as well as a final speech by John Africa about the survival of the planet. The jury, with tears in their eyes, exonerated them completely.
--A few months later, MOVE sympathizer Abdul Jon was able to get assault charges thrown out against him, Jeanette, and Teresa África, at least temporarily, after the three suffered a brutal beating by the police. His clear, logical arguments made the high-sounding (false) arguments of the D.A. laughable. Although it was a minor victory, says Mumia, it gives something of the flavor of the long string of MOVE trials.
Mumia brings out the irony of the situation in which even though John Africa was exonerated by a jury for possession of arms and explosives, he was murdered on May 13, 1985, along with Theresa Africa and 9 other MOVE members with explosives illegally obtained from the federal government to bomb MOVE’s house. Yet not a single local or federal agent was ever brought to justice. The only person accused, tried, and sentenced to 7 years for “inciting a riot” was Ramona Africa, who dared to survive the massacre. If she hadn’t handled her own case, she would probably have spent many more years in jail, due to all the initial charges against her.
Mumia has no doubt about the fact that, in the final analysis, the law is whatever the judge says it is. In one interesting chapter, he explores several definitions of the law, including that of the person “now deemed the avatar of Western Capitalism,” Adam Smith: “Laws and governments may be considered in this and indeed in every case as a combination of the rich to oppress the poor, and preserve to themselves the in¬equality of the goods which would otherwise be soon destroyed by the attacks of the poor, who if not hin¬dered by the government would soon reduce the oth¬ers to an equality with themselves by open violence.”
For prisoners, however, the law is neither a theory nor an idea because they experience its brutal reality. Furthermore, those who know Black History are aware that millions of people were legally enslaved. There were different laws for Africans, called “Slave Codes,” which reemerged after the Civil War as “Black Codes” and penalized behavior such as “vagrancy, breach of job contracts, absence from work, possession of firearms, and insulting gestures or acts.” Mumia explains that precisely because jailhouse lawyers had challenged the use of the law as an instrument of domination, former President Bill Clinton, in 1996, achieved the passage of a law limiting the rights of prisoners to file appeals or suits and prohibiting recovery for psychological or mental harm or injury, in violation of the Convention against Torture. To the Slave Codes and the Black Codes, he says, we can now add Prison Codes.
Naturally, the book reveals many aspects of the conditions in United States prisons, including the torture practiced there: “What millions saw in the garish reflections of Iraq was but a foreign edition of the reality of American prisons: places of legalized torture, humiliation and abuse—practices exported from domestic U.S. hellholes to ones overseas.”
What distinguishes street lawyers from jailhouse lawyers? The conservative bent in the profession, explains Mumia, goes back to the days when professional lawyers were seen as instruments of the British Crown, who only worked for the rich. “Of the fifty-six men who signed the Declaration of Independence (no women signed) in 1776, twenty-nine of them, or roughly 52 percent, were lawyers or judges. They would erect a legal structure that would protect property yet deprecate freedom—at least the freedom of enslaved African people. The lawyers brought with them a sensibility that is at the heart of the profession, an inbred conservatism.” As a matter of fact, the first three Presidents of the United States were aristocrats, albeit without title, and slave owners. “They helped erect a legal structure that would protect the wealth and privileges of their class.”
Today, when lawyers graduate from law school, they aren’t “officers of the community,” but “officers of the court.” Their loyalty is not the accused, but instead “to the court, the bench, the civil throne.” This explains, at least in part, the great distance that exists between lawyer and client and the client’s lack of trust in him. It is almost impossible for a poor person to have a good lawyer and even more so when the defendant is not white.
Jailhouse lawyers, however, have a different relationship to the State. In some cases, even the most progressive street lawyers have taken the side of the State against them. Mumia explains that in the midst of the post 9/11 anthrax scare, several states passed laws allowing the State to open legal or court mail outside the presence of the prisoner, in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. The measure was negotiated with the support of the liberal American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) but finally rolled back thanks to the hard work of three jailhouse lawyers ––Derrick Dale Fontroy, Theodore Savage, and Aaron C. Wheeler. On the other hand, it’s extremely rare for a jailhouse lawyer to negotiate a case. They have no loyalty to the court, they’re not professional lawyers, and they have no one to whom they can sell out. They’re not part of the “club.”
Even with the high esteem that Mumia has for the jailhouse lawyers described in this book, he also points out the limits of their efforts. At the end of the ‘70s, Delbert Africa had warned him of a dangerous trap. He explained that the problem is that many prisoners study the law, they believe the law, and they believe it applies to them. Then, when they realize that the system doesn’t follow its own laws, and that on the contrary, laws are made and broken at the whim of the judge, they just go crazy.
Mumia assures us that he has known prisoners who have gone mad for this very reason. He’s also known some who have taken advantage of the prisoners they represent. But the main limit he points out is the insufficiency of their good efforts when it comes to making fundamental changes in the prison system. In order to put an end to this system, any effort to use the law against power must be in the context of broad social movements, both inside and outside of the prisons, to transform the society as a whole.
Modest, as ever, Mumia barely mentions his own work as a jailhouse lawyer who has helped other prisoners get out of prison. One of these is Harold Wilson, who has now changed his name to Amin, participates in the campaign to free Mumia, and spoke at the book presentation in Philadelphia on April 24 and in New York City on April 25.
Videos from Philadelphia event:
(Universal African Dance & Drum Ensemble:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fyKTmH4A8E
(Samiya Davis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkR2IH0QkoQ)
(Abdul Jon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJE2b2uKksg)
Angela Davis speaking in Oakland: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkoAwPRiRfI
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Presos que defienden a presos: reseña del nuevo libro de Mumia Abu-Jamal
“Sólo quiero contar una historia que nunca se ha contado,” dice Mumia Abu-Jamal sobre su nuevo libro Jailhouse Lawyers: Prisoners Defending Prisoners v. the U.S.A. (Abogados desde la cárcel: presos que defienden a presos vs. Estados Unidos), City Lights Books, 2009.
El sexto libro escrito por Mumia Abu-Jamal desde el corredor de la muerte se publica justamente en el momento cuando la Suprema Corte de Estados Unidos le avienta la puerta en la cara y la campaña para ejecutarlo se renueva. Es presentado el 24 de abril en Filadelfia, Nueva York, Oakland, Detroit, Boston, Houston, Portland, Los Ángeles, Seattle, Olympia, Baltimore y Washington D.C., para festejar su cumpleaños y abrir una nueva etapa en la batalla por su vida y libertad.
(Vean: Universal African Dance & Drum Ensemble en el evento de Filadelfia http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fyKTmH4A8E)
Nos dice que hay decenas de miles de jailhouse lawyers en las cárceles de Estados Unidos. Poco conocidos en el mundo fuera de los muros, son hombres y mujeres que litigan sus propios casos, defienden a otros presos o levantan demandas para efectuar cambios en las condiciones de las prisiones. Con agudeza, respeto, empatía y humor, Mumia presenta las palabras y vivencias de una treintena de ellos, algunos que él ha conocido personalmente en las prisiones de Pensilvania y otros que le han enviado cartas o respuestas a sus encuestas. La mayoría batallan en terreno ajeno porque no tenían estudios formales en derecho antes de ingresar a la prisión; son autodidactas y han aprendido la ley bajo el tutelaje de otros presos con más experiencia.
Dice Mumia: “No se han olvidado pelear. No se han olvidado resistir. No se han olvidado ayudar a los demás, en muchos casos las personas más indefensas. Y no se han olvidado ganar....Algunas de estas personas han salvado las vidas de otras, literalmente. Otras han cambiado las reglas del juego”. Para agradecerles sus servicios en proteger la Constitución, las autoridades suelen castigar a estos abogados más que a cualquier otro grupo de presos.
En este libro, conocemos a Steve Evans, quien estudió el derecho por su cuenta y enseñó a muchos otros presos cómo litigar un caso – a todos menos los soplones y violadores de niños. Su alumno Warren Henderson tuvo que aprender a leer en prisión antes de estudiar el derecho, pero tan grande era su pasión para la lectura que robó cientos de libros para realizar su sueño de organizar una biblioteca en su barrio al salir de prisión, y en varias ocasiones tuvo éxito en defenderse. Midge DeLuca, quien padecía el cáncer, decidió ayudar a las otras presas enfermas después de leer la línea de su poeta favorita Audre Lorde: “Sólo nuestros silencios nos lastimarán”.
También conocemos a varios rebeldes, revolucionarios y presos políticos, inclusive los integrantes y simpatizantes de la organización MOVE, quienes desafiaron la autoridad de las cortes rotundamente en una larga serie de juicios; Rashaan Brooks-Bey, organizador de huelgas y otras acciones por los derechos de presos, quien junto con sus compañeros Russell Maroon Shoatz, Robert Joyner y Kareem Howard, solía enfrentar al juez directamente y exigía el encarcelamiento de los policías; Martin Sostre, el legendario organizador de la librería Afro-Asiático en Buffalo, NY, quien influyó en el pensamiento de muchos otros presos; Iron Thunderhorse, organizador por los derechos de presos, ahora legalmente ciego; y Ed Mead, originalmente un preso social que se volvió activista por los derechos de presos, después integrante de la Brigada George Jackson y co fundador de Prison Legal News.
Ante el desprecio de los jueces y fiscales, la extrema falta de recursos, y la apatía pública, los abogados desde la cárcel frecuentemente pierden sus casos, pero también han ganado unas impresionantes victorias.
-- En el estado de Pensilvania, Richard Mayberry empezó sus batallas para auto-representarse a mediados de los años ’60 y a pesar de duros castigos en el hoyo, quitó unos obstáculos para hacerlo. También ganó una demanda en 1978, que resultó en drásticos cambios en las prisiones de varios estados en el terreno de salud, hacinamiento y castigos tales como las “jaulas de vidrio”, entre muchas otras cosas.
-- En 1971, David Ruiz levantó una demanda contra el sistema carcelario del estado de Tejas, operado como una plantación de esclavos, la cual resultó en extensas reformas ordenadas por el juez William Wayne Justice.
-- En Pensilvania a principio de los años ‘80, una demanda presentada por Rashaan Brooks-Bey de parte de todos los presos logró que una unidad represiva fuera cerrada en la prisión de Pittsburgh. Los presos ganaron dos horas de ejercicio al aire libre en lugar de quince minutos, servicio de lavandería, tapaderas para las charolas de comida, y una prohibición a la práctica de desnudarlos cuatro veces cada vez que recibieran visitas.
-- En el estado de California, Jane Dorotik entabla apelaciones que han resultado en la libertad de un buen número de mujeres falsamente encarceladas en el penal Chowchilla. Su trabajo está destacado en un capítulo dedicado al trabajo de varias presas abogadas ante el tremendo aumento en el encarcelamiento de mujeres-- 300% en años recientes.
-- Barry “Running Bear” Gibbs (el Oso) logró que su propia sentencia de muerte fuera revocada igual que las de otros dos presos. Se acuerda de como se sentía cuando uno de los jóvenes le gritó las buenas noticias. Dice el Oso: “Salvarle la vida a alguien por medio de tinta y papel es una experiencia grata e inolvidable”.
-- La vergonzosa condena de 9 integrantes de la organización MOVE a desde 30 a 100 años en prisión en 1978, fue seguida por una asombrosa victoria para la organización en 1981, cuando Mo y John África se defendieron con éxito contra cargos de acopio de armas y explosivos. Sus tácticas poco comunes incluyeron un citatorio a sus 9 compañeros encarcelados para dar testimonio sobre los propósitos de su lucha, el buen carácter de John África y la traición de los testigos de cargo, más un discurso final de John África sobre la sobrevivencia del planeta. El jurado, con lágrimas en los ojos, los exoneró completamente.
--Unos meses después, el simpatizante de MOVE Abdul Jon logró la revocación temporal de cargos de agresión con lesiones contra él, Jeanette y Theresa África cuando fueron ellos los que sufrieron una golpiza brutal por la policía. Sus argumentos sencillos y lógicos hacen risibles los altisonantes (y falsos) argumentos de la fiscalía. Aunque fuera una victoria menor, dice Mumia, da el sabor de la larga serie de procesos contra MOVE.
Mumia señala la ironía de que aunque John África fue absuelto por un jurado del acopio de armas y explosivos, él fue asesinado el 13 de mayo de 1985, junto con Theresa África y otros 9 integrantes de MOVE con explosivos obtenidos ilegalmente del gobierno de Estados Unidos para bombardear la casa colectiva de MOVE. Sin embargo, ningún agente local o federal fue enjuiciado por el crimen. La única persona acusada, enjuiciada y condenada a 7 años por “incitar un motín” fue Ramona África, quien “se atrevió a sobrevivir la matanza.” De no haber manejado su propio caso, ella probablemente hubiera pasado muchos años más en la cárcel, dadas todas las acusaciones iniciales en su contra.
Para Mumia, no cabe duda de que, al fin y al cabo, la ley es lo que diga el juez. En un capítulo interesante, explora varias definiciones de la ley, inclusive la del hombre conocido como “el avatar del capitalismo occidental,” Adán Smith: “La ley y los gobiernos se pueden considerar...como una combinación de los ricos para oprimir a los pobres para conservar para ellos la desigualdad de los bienes, los cuales de otra manera estarían destruidas por los asaltos de los pobres, quienes, si no impedidos por el gobierno, muy pronto reducirían a los demás a una igualdad con ellos a través de la violencia abierta”.
Sin embargo, para los presos, la ley no es una teoría o una idea porque viven la brutal realidad. Además, los que conocen la historia africano-americana en Estados Unidos saben que millones de personas fueron esclavizados legalmente. Hubo leyes distintas para los Africanos llamadas los “Códigos de Esclavos”, los cuales reaparecieron después de la Guerra Civil como los “Códigos Negros” que penalizaron conductas como el vagabundeo, posesión de armas, ausencia del trabajo, gestos o actos insultantes. Mumia sostiene que precisamente porque los abogados desde la cárcel habían retado la utilización de la ley como instrumento de dominación, el ex presidente Bill Clinton, en 1996, logró la aprobación de una ley que limita los derechos de los presos para entablar apelaciones o demandas y prohíbe las indemnizaciones punitivas por daños y perjuicios psicológicos o mentales, en violación de la Convención contra la Tortura. A los “Códigos de Esclavos” y los “Códigos Negros”, dice Mumia, se suman los “Códigos de Prisión”.
Naturalmente, el libro revela muchos aspectos de las condiciones en las prisiones de Estados Unidos, incluso la tortura practicada ahí: “Lo que millones vimos en las reflexiones espeluznantes de Irak no era otra cosa que una edición exterior de la realidad de las prisiones estadounidenses: lugares de tortura, humillación y abuso ––prácticas exportadas de los infiernos domésticos de este país a otros en el extranjero”.
¿En qué se distinguen los abogados licenciados en derecho y los abogados de la cárcel? El conservadurismo inherente en la profesión, explica Mumia, se remonta a los días cuando los licenciados eran vistos como instrumentos de la Corona Británica que sólo trabajaban para los ricos. “De los 56 hombres que firmaron la Declaración de Independencia (ninguna mujer firmó) en 1776, 29 de ellos, o aproximadamente 52 por ciento, eran abogados o jueces. Establecieron una estructura legal que protegía la propiedad pero que despreciaba la libertad ––por lo menos la libertad del pueblo africano esclavizado. Los abogados trajeron con ellos una sensibilidad que está en el corazón de la profesión, un conservadurismo innato”. De hecho, los tres primeros presidentes de Estados Unidos eran aristócratas, aunque sin título, y dueños de esclavos. “Establecieron una estructura legal para proteger la riqueza y privilegio de su clase”.
Hoy en día cuando los abogados se reciben, no son “oficiales de la comunidad”, sino “oficiales de la corte”. Su lealtad no es al acusado sino “a la corte, al banco, al trono civil”. Esto explica, en parte, la gran distancia entre el licenciado y su cliente y la falta de confianza que el cliente le tiene. Es casi imposible que una persona pobre tenga un buen abogado y aún más difícil cuando el acusado no sea blanco.
Los abogados desde la cárcel, sin embargo, tienen una relación diferente con el Estado. En unos casos, hasta los abogados muy progresistas han tomado el lado del Estado contra ellos. Explica Mumia que en medio de la histeria post 9/11 sobre el ántrax, varios estados aprobaron leyes que permitieron al Estado abrir correo legal fuera de la presencia de los presos, en violación de la Primera Enmienda a la Constitución. La medida fue negociada con el apoyo de la liberal Unión Americana de Libertades Civiles (ACLU) pero por fin revocada gracias a los duros esfuerzos de tres abogados desde la cárcel ––Derrick Dale Fontroy, Theodore Savage, y Aaron C. Wheeler. Por otro lado, es raro que los abogados desde la cárcel negocien un caso. No tienen lealtad a la corte, no son licenciados, y no tienen nadie a quién venderse. No son parte del “club”.
Con todo el aprecio que Mumia les tiene a los abogados retratados en este libro, él también señala los límites de sus esfuerzos. A finales de los años ’70, Delbert África le había avisado de una peligrosa trampa. Le explicó que el problema reside en que muchos de estos presos estudian la ley, creen en la ley, creen que se aplica a ellos, y cuando se dan cuenta que el Sistema no sigue sus propias leyes, que al contrario, la ley se hace y se rompe al antojo de los jueces, se vuelven locos.
Mumia afirma haber conocido unos presos vueltos locos precisamente por esta razón. También ha conocido unos que han abusado de los presos que representan. Sin embargo, el límite más fuerte que él señala es la insuficiencia de sus buenos esfuerzos para lograr cambios fundamentales en el sistema carcelario. Para acabar con este sistema, cualquier esfuerzo para utilizar la ley contra el poder tiene que ser parte de amplios movimientos dentro y fuera de las prisiones para transformar la sociedad.
Humilde, como siempre, Mumia apenas menciona sus propios esfuerzos como abogado autodidacta que ha ayudado a otros presos salir de prisión. Uno de ellos es Harold Wilson, quien ha escogido el nombre Amin y ahora participa en la campaña para liberar a Mumia. Fue uno de los invitados a hablar en el evento del 24 de abril en la ciudad de Nueva York.
http://www.phillyimc.org/en/prisoners-defending-prisoners-review-new-book-mumia-abu-jamal
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/04/30/18592062.php
Prisoners Defending Prisoners: Review of new book by Mumia Abu-Jamal
by Carolina Saldaña
(Spanish language version below)
“My only wish is to tell a story that has never been told before,” says Mumia Abu-Jamal of his new book Jailhouse Lawyers: Prisoners Defending Prisoners v. the U.S.A., City Lights Books, 2009.
Mumia Abu-Jamal’s sixth book written from death row is coming out at the very time that the Supreme Court of the United States has slammed the door in his face and the campaign to execute him has been renewed. The book was presented on April 24 in Philadelphia, New York, Oakland, Detroit, Boston, Houston, Portland, Los Ángeles, Seattle, Olympia, Baltimore, and Washington D.C., to celebrate his birthday and open a new stage in the battle for his life and freedom.
(See Universal African Dance & Drum Ensemble at Philadelphia event:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fyKTmH4A8E)
He tells us that there are tens of thousands of jailhouse lawyers in the prisons of the United States. Little known, if they are known at all, outside prison walls, they are men and women who handle their own cases, defend other prisoners, or file suits to bring about changes in prison conditions. With insight, respect, empathy, and humor, Mumia brings us the words and experiences of around thirty of them, some of whom he has known personally in the prisons of Pennsylvania and others who have corresponded with him or responded to his surveys. Most of them fight their cases in unfamiliar territory because they didn’t go to law school before they ended up in prison; they’ve learned the law on their own, usually with the help of other, more experienced prisoners.
“They've not forgotten how to fight,” says Mumia. “They've not forgotten how to resist. They've not forgotten how to help others, often the most helpless around them. And they've not forgotten how to win.... Some of these people have, quite literally, saved people's lives by their work. Others have changed the rules of the game.”
To thank them for their services in protecting the Constitution, they are punished more harshly than any other single group of prisoners.
In this book, we get to know Steve Evans, who learned the law by himself and taught many other prisoners (with the exception of snitches and baby rapers) how to handle their own cases. His pupil Warren Henderson had to learn to read before he could learn the law, but he developed such a love of reading that he stole hundreds of books with the dream of setting up a library for the kids in the ‘hood when he got out of prison, and went on to successfully defend himself in court. Midge DeLuca, who had cancer when she went to jail decided to help other women who needed medical care after reading a line from her favorite poet Audre Lorde, “only our silences will hurt us.”
We also meet quite a few rebels, revolutionaries, and political prisoners, such as the MOVE members and sympathizers who dramatically defied the authority of the courts in a long series of trials, often with unorthodox tactics; Rashaan Brooks-Bey, who organized strikes and other actions for prisoners’ rights, and along with his co-plaintiffs Russell Maroon Shoatz, Robert Joyner, and Kareem Howard, openly confronted the judge and demanded that the police be jailed; Martin Sostre, the legendary organizer of the Afro-Asian Book Store in Buffalo, NY, who won many suits and influenced many of his fellow prisoners; Iron Thunderhorse, long-time prisoners’ rights organizer, now legally blind; and Ed Mead, originally a social prisoner turned prisoners’ rights activist, and later member of the George Jackson Brigade and then co-founder of Prison Legal News.
Scorned by judges and district attorneys and faced with a serious lack of resources and public apathy, jailhouse lawyers often lose their cases, but they have scored some impressive wins.
-- In Pennsylvania, Richard Mayberry’s battles to represent himself began in the mid-‘60s, and in spite of being sent to the hole many times, he finally eliminated some of the major obstacles. He also won a class-action suit in 1978 that brought drastic changes in the prisons of several states in the areas of health, overcrowding, and punishments such as the “glass cages.”
-- In 1971, David Ruiz filed suit against the Texas prison system, which was run like a slave plantation, resulting in far-reaching reforms ordered by Judge William Wayne Justice.
-- In Pennsylvania, at the beginning of the ‘80s, a class action suit filed by Rashaan Brooks-Bey resulted in the closure of a repressive unit at the Pittsburgh prison. The prisoners also won two hours of outdoor exercise instead of fifteen minutes, laundry service, covered food trays, and an end to four strip searches every time they had a visitor.
-- In California, appeals filed by Jane Dorotik have led to the freedom of a good number of women falsely imprisoned at Chowchilla. Her work is underscored in a chapter dedicated to the work of several women jailhouse lawyers at a time when there has been a tremendous increase in the women’s prison population ––300% in the last few years.
-- Barry “Running Bear” Gibbs achieved the revocation of his own death sentence as well as those of two other prisoners. He remembers how he felt when one of them yelled out the good news. Says Running Bear: “Saving someone’s life via pen and paper is a rewarding and unforgettable experience.”
-- The shameful sentencing of 9 MOVE members to prison terms of 30-100 years in 1978 was followed by an astounding victory for the organization in 1981, when Mo and John Africa successfully defended themselves on arms and explosives charges. Their unusual tactics included summoning the 9 MOVE prisoners to testify about the aims of their struggle, the good character of John Africa, and the treason of the state’s witnesses, as well as a final speech by John Africa about the survival of the planet. The jury, with tears in their eyes, exonerated them completely.
--A few months later, MOVE sympathizer Abdul Jon was able to get assault charges thrown out against him, Jeanette, and Teresa África, at least temporarily, after the three suffered a brutal beating by the police. His clear, logical arguments made the high-sounding (false) arguments of the D.A. laughable. Although it was a minor victory, says Mumia, it gives something of the flavor of the long string of MOVE trials.
Mumia brings out the irony of the situation in which even though John Africa was exonerated by a jury for possession of arms and explosives, he was murdered on May 13, 1985, along with Theresa Africa and 9 other MOVE members with explosives illegally obtained from the federal government to bomb MOVE’s house. Yet not a single local or federal agent was ever brought to justice. The only person accused, tried, and sentenced to 7 years for “inciting a riot” was Ramona Africa, who dared to survive the massacre. If she hadn’t handled her own case, she would probably have spent many more years in jail, due to all the initial charges against her.
Mumia has no doubt about the fact that, in the final analysis, the law is whatever the judge says it is. In one interesting chapter, he explores several definitions of the law, including that of the person “now deemed the avatar of Western Capitalism,” Adam Smith: “Laws and governments may be considered in this and indeed in every case as a combination of the rich to oppress the poor, and preserve to themselves the in¬equality of the goods which would otherwise be soon destroyed by the attacks of the poor, who if not hin¬dered by the government would soon reduce the oth¬ers to an equality with themselves by open violence.”
For prisoners, however, the law is neither a theory nor an idea because they experience its brutal reality. Furthermore, those who know Black History are aware that millions of people were legally enslaved. There were different laws for Africans, called “Slave Codes,” which reemerged after the Civil War as “Black Codes” and penalized behavior such as “vagrancy, breach of job contracts, absence from work, possession of firearms, and insulting gestures or acts.” Mumia explains that precisely because jailhouse lawyers had challenged the use of the law as an instrument of domination, former President Bill Clinton, in 1996, achieved the passage of a law limiting the rights of prisoners to file appeals or suits and prohibiting recovery for psychological or mental harm or injury, in violation of the Convention against Torture. To the Slave Codes and the Black Codes, he says, we can now add Prison Codes.
Naturally, the book reveals many aspects of the conditions in United States prisons, including the torture practiced there: “What millions saw in the garish reflections of Iraq was but a foreign edition of the reality of American prisons: places of legalized torture, humiliation and abuse—practices exported from domestic U.S. hellholes to ones overseas.”
What distinguishes street lawyers from jailhouse lawyers? The conservative bent in the profession, explains Mumia, goes back to the days when professional lawyers were seen as instruments of the British Crown, who only worked for the rich. “Of the fifty-six men who signed the Declaration of Independence (no women signed) in 1776, twenty-nine of them, or roughly 52 percent, were lawyers or judges. They would erect a legal structure that would protect property yet deprecate freedom—at least the freedom of enslaved African people. The lawyers brought with them a sensibility that is at the heart of the profession, an inbred conservatism.” As a matter of fact, the first three Presidents of the United States were aristocrats, albeit without title, and slave owners. “They helped erect a legal structure that would protect the wealth and privileges of their class.”
Today, when lawyers graduate from law school, they aren’t “officers of the community,” but “officers of the court.” Their loyalty is not the accused, but instead “to the court, the bench, the civil throne.” This explains, at least in part, the great distance that exists between lawyer and client and the client’s lack of trust in him. It is almost impossible for a poor person to have a good lawyer and even more so when the defendant is not white.
Jailhouse lawyers, however, have a different relationship to the State. In some cases, even the most progressive street lawyers have taken the side of the State against them. Mumia explains that in the midst of the post 9/11 anthrax scare, several states passed laws allowing the State to open legal or court mail outside the presence of the prisoner, in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. The measure was negotiated with the support of the liberal American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) but finally rolled back thanks to the hard work of three jailhouse lawyers ––Derrick Dale Fontroy, Theodore Savage, and Aaron C. Wheeler. On the other hand, it’s extremely rare for a jailhouse lawyer to negotiate a case. They have no loyalty to the court, they’re not professional lawyers, and they have no one to whom they can sell out. They’re not part of the “club.”
Even with the high esteem that Mumia has for the jailhouse lawyers described in this book, he also points out the limits of their efforts. At the end of the ‘70s, Delbert Africa had warned him of a dangerous trap. He explained that the problem is that many prisoners study the law, they believe the law, and they believe it applies to them. Then, when they realize that the system doesn’t follow its own laws, and that on the contrary, laws are made and broken at the whim of the judge, they just go crazy.
Mumia assures us that he has known prisoners who have gone mad for this very reason. He’s also known some who have taken advantage of the prisoners they represent. But the main limit he points out is the insufficiency of their good efforts when it comes to making fundamental changes in the prison system. In order to put an end to this system, any effort to use the law against power must be in the context of broad social movements, both inside and outside of the prisons, to transform the society as a whole.
Modest, as ever, Mumia barely mentions his own work as a jailhouse lawyer who has helped other prisoners get out of prison. One of these is Harold Wilson, who has now changed his name to Amin, participates in the campaign to free Mumia, and spoke at the book presentation in Philadelphia on April 24 and in New York City on April 25.
Videos from Philadelphia event:
(Universal African Dance & Drum Ensemble:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fyKTmH4A8E
(Samiya Davis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkR2IH0QkoQ)
(Abdul Jon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJE2b2uKksg)
Angela Davis speaking in Oakland: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkoAwPRiRfI
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Presos que defienden a presos: reseña del nuevo libro de Mumia Abu-Jamal
“Sólo quiero contar una historia que nunca se ha contado,” dice Mumia Abu-Jamal sobre su nuevo libro Jailhouse Lawyers: Prisoners Defending Prisoners v. the U.S.A. (Abogados desde la cárcel: presos que defienden a presos vs. Estados Unidos), City Lights Books, 2009.
El sexto libro escrito por Mumia Abu-Jamal desde el corredor de la muerte se publica justamente en el momento cuando la Suprema Corte de Estados Unidos le avienta la puerta en la cara y la campaña para ejecutarlo se renueva. Es presentado el 24 de abril en Filadelfia, Nueva York, Oakland, Detroit, Boston, Houston, Portland, Los Ángeles, Seattle, Olympia, Baltimore y Washington D.C., para festejar su cumpleaños y abrir una nueva etapa en la batalla por su vida y libertad.
(Vean: Universal African Dance & Drum Ensemble en el evento de Filadelfia http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fyKTmH4A8E)
Nos dice que hay decenas de miles de jailhouse lawyers en las cárceles de Estados Unidos. Poco conocidos en el mundo fuera de los muros, son hombres y mujeres que litigan sus propios casos, defienden a otros presos o levantan demandas para efectuar cambios en las condiciones de las prisiones. Con agudeza, respeto, empatía y humor, Mumia presenta las palabras y vivencias de una treintena de ellos, algunos que él ha conocido personalmente en las prisiones de Pensilvania y otros que le han enviado cartas o respuestas a sus encuestas. La mayoría batallan en terreno ajeno porque no tenían estudios formales en derecho antes de ingresar a la prisión; son autodidactas y han aprendido la ley bajo el tutelaje de otros presos con más experiencia.
Dice Mumia: “No se han olvidado pelear. No se han olvidado resistir. No se han olvidado ayudar a los demás, en muchos casos las personas más indefensas. Y no se han olvidado ganar....Algunas de estas personas han salvado las vidas de otras, literalmente. Otras han cambiado las reglas del juego”. Para agradecerles sus servicios en proteger la Constitución, las autoridades suelen castigar a estos abogados más que a cualquier otro grupo de presos.
En este libro, conocemos a Steve Evans, quien estudió el derecho por su cuenta y enseñó a muchos otros presos cómo litigar un caso – a todos menos los soplones y violadores de niños. Su alumno Warren Henderson tuvo que aprender a leer en prisión antes de estudiar el derecho, pero tan grande era su pasión para la lectura que robó cientos de libros para realizar su sueño de organizar una biblioteca en su barrio al salir de prisión, y en varias ocasiones tuvo éxito en defenderse. Midge DeLuca, quien padecía el cáncer, decidió ayudar a las otras presas enfermas después de leer la línea de su poeta favorita Audre Lorde: “Sólo nuestros silencios nos lastimarán”.
También conocemos a varios rebeldes, revolucionarios y presos políticos, inclusive los integrantes y simpatizantes de la organización MOVE, quienes desafiaron la autoridad de las cortes rotundamente en una larga serie de juicios; Rashaan Brooks-Bey, organizador de huelgas y otras acciones por los derechos de presos, quien junto con sus compañeros Russell Maroon Shoatz, Robert Joyner y Kareem Howard, solía enfrentar al juez directamente y exigía el encarcelamiento de los policías; Martin Sostre, el legendario organizador de la librería Afro-Asiático en Buffalo, NY, quien influyó en el pensamiento de muchos otros presos; Iron Thunderhorse, organizador por los derechos de presos, ahora legalmente ciego; y Ed Mead, originalmente un preso social que se volvió activista por los derechos de presos, después integrante de la Brigada George Jackson y co fundador de Prison Legal News.
Ante el desprecio de los jueces y fiscales, la extrema falta de recursos, y la apatía pública, los abogados desde la cárcel frecuentemente pierden sus casos, pero también han ganado unas impresionantes victorias.
-- En el estado de Pensilvania, Richard Mayberry empezó sus batallas para auto-representarse a mediados de los años ’60 y a pesar de duros castigos en el hoyo, quitó unos obstáculos para hacerlo. También ganó una demanda en 1978, que resultó en drásticos cambios en las prisiones de varios estados en el terreno de salud, hacinamiento y castigos tales como las “jaulas de vidrio”, entre muchas otras cosas.
-- En 1971, David Ruiz levantó una demanda contra el sistema carcelario del estado de Tejas, operado como una plantación de esclavos, la cual resultó en extensas reformas ordenadas por el juez William Wayne Justice.
-- En Pensilvania a principio de los años ‘80, una demanda presentada por Rashaan Brooks-Bey de parte de todos los presos logró que una unidad represiva fuera cerrada en la prisión de Pittsburgh. Los presos ganaron dos horas de ejercicio al aire libre en lugar de quince minutos, servicio de lavandería, tapaderas para las charolas de comida, y una prohibición a la práctica de desnudarlos cuatro veces cada vez que recibieran visitas.
-- En el estado de California, Jane Dorotik entabla apelaciones que han resultado en la libertad de un buen número de mujeres falsamente encarceladas en el penal Chowchilla. Su trabajo está destacado en un capítulo dedicado al trabajo de varias presas abogadas ante el tremendo aumento en el encarcelamiento de mujeres-- 300% en años recientes.
-- Barry “Running Bear” Gibbs (el Oso) logró que su propia sentencia de muerte fuera revocada igual que las de otros dos presos. Se acuerda de como se sentía cuando uno de los jóvenes le gritó las buenas noticias. Dice el Oso: “Salvarle la vida a alguien por medio de tinta y papel es una experiencia grata e inolvidable”.
-- La vergonzosa condena de 9 integrantes de la organización MOVE a desde 30 a 100 años en prisión en 1978, fue seguida por una asombrosa victoria para la organización en 1981, cuando Mo y John África se defendieron con éxito contra cargos de acopio de armas y explosivos. Sus tácticas poco comunes incluyeron un citatorio a sus 9 compañeros encarcelados para dar testimonio sobre los propósitos de su lucha, el buen carácter de John África y la traición de los testigos de cargo, más un discurso final de John África sobre la sobrevivencia del planeta. El jurado, con lágrimas en los ojos, los exoneró completamente.
--Unos meses después, el simpatizante de MOVE Abdul Jon logró la revocación temporal de cargos de agresión con lesiones contra él, Jeanette y Theresa África cuando fueron ellos los que sufrieron una golpiza brutal por la policía. Sus argumentos sencillos y lógicos hacen risibles los altisonantes (y falsos) argumentos de la fiscalía. Aunque fuera una victoria menor, dice Mumia, da el sabor de la larga serie de procesos contra MOVE.
Mumia señala la ironía de que aunque John África fue absuelto por un jurado del acopio de armas y explosivos, él fue asesinado el 13 de mayo de 1985, junto con Theresa África y otros 9 integrantes de MOVE con explosivos obtenidos ilegalmente del gobierno de Estados Unidos para bombardear la casa colectiva de MOVE. Sin embargo, ningún agente local o federal fue enjuiciado por el crimen. La única persona acusada, enjuiciada y condenada a 7 años por “incitar un motín” fue Ramona África, quien “se atrevió a sobrevivir la matanza.” De no haber manejado su propio caso, ella probablemente hubiera pasado muchos años más en la cárcel, dadas todas las acusaciones iniciales en su contra.
Para Mumia, no cabe duda de que, al fin y al cabo, la ley es lo que diga el juez. En un capítulo interesante, explora varias definiciones de la ley, inclusive la del hombre conocido como “el avatar del capitalismo occidental,” Adán Smith: “La ley y los gobiernos se pueden considerar...como una combinación de los ricos para oprimir a los pobres para conservar para ellos la desigualdad de los bienes, los cuales de otra manera estarían destruidas por los asaltos de los pobres, quienes, si no impedidos por el gobierno, muy pronto reducirían a los demás a una igualdad con ellos a través de la violencia abierta”.
Sin embargo, para los presos, la ley no es una teoría o una idea porque viven la brutal realidad. Además, los que conocen la historia africano-americana en Estados Unidos saben que millones de personas fueron esclavizados legalmente. Hubo leyes distintas para los Africanos llamadas los “Códigos de Esclavos”, los cuales reaparecieron después de la Guerra Civil como los “Códigos Negros” que penalizaron conductas como el vagabundeo, posesión de armas, ausencia del trabajo, gestos o actos insultantes. Mumia sostiene que precisamente porque los abogados desde la cárcel habían retado la utilización de la ley como instrumento de dominación, el ex presidente Bill Clinton, en 1996, logró la aprobación de una ley que limita los derechos de los presos para entablar apelaciones o demandas y prohíbe las indemnizaciones punitivas por daños y perjuicios psicológicos o mentales, en violación de la Convención contra la Tortura. A los “Códigos de Esclavos” y los “Códigos Negros”, dice Mumia, se suman los “Códigos de Prisión”.
Naturalmente, el libro revela muchos aspectos de las condiciones en las prisiones de Estados Unidos, incluso la tortura practicada ahí: “Lo que millones vimos en las reflexiones espeluznantes de Irak no era otra cosa que una edición exterior de la realidad de las prisiones estadounidenses: lugares de tortura, humillación y abuso ––prácticas exportadas de los infiernos domésticos de este país a otros en el extranjero”.
¿En qué se distinguen los abogados licenciados en derecho y los abogados de la cárcel? El conservadurismo inherente en la profesión, explica Mumia, se remonta a los días cuando los licenciados eran vistos como instrumentos de la Corona Británica que sólo trabajaban para los ricos. “De los 56 hombres que firmaron la Declaración de Independencia (ninguna mujer firmó) en 1776, 29 de ellos, o aproximadamente 52 por ciento, eran abogados o jueces. Establecieron una estructura legal que protegía la propiedad pero que despreciaba la libertad ––por lo menos la libertad del pueblo africano esclavizado. Los abogados trajeron con ellos una sensibilidad que está en el corazón de la profesión, un conservadurismo innato”. De hecho, los tres primeros presidentes de Estados Unidos eran aristócratas, aunque sin título, y dueños de esclavos. “Establecieron una estructura legal para proteger la riqueza y privilegio de su clase”.
Hoy en día cuando los abogados se reciben, no son “oficiales de la comunidad”, sino “oficiales de la corte”. Su lealtad no es al acusado sino “a la corte, al banco, al trono civil”. Esto explica, en parte, la gran distancia entre el licenciado y su cliente y la falta de confianza que el cliente le tiene. Es casi imposible que una persona pobre tenga un buen abogado y aún más difícil cuando el acusado no sea blanco.
Los abogados desde la cárcel, sin embargo, tienen una relación diferente con el Estado. En unos casos, hasta los abogados muy progresistas han tomado el lado del Estado contra ellos. Explica Mumia que en medio de la histeria post 9/11 sobre el ántrax, varios estados aprobaron leyes que permitieron al Estado abrir correo legal fuera de la presencia de los presos, en violación de la Primera Enmienda a la Constitución. La medida fue negociada con el apoyo de la liberal Unión Americana de Libertades Civiles (ACLU) pero por fin revocada gracias a los duros esfuerzos de tres abogados desde la cárcel ––Derrick Dale Fontroy, Theodore Savage, y Aaron C. Wheeler. Por otro lado, es raro que los abogados desde la cárcel negocien un caso. No tienen lealtad a la corte, no son licenciados, y no tienen nadie a quién venderse. No son parte del “club”.
Con todo el aprecio que Mumia les tiene a los abogados retratados en este libro, él también señala los límites de sus esfuerzos. A finales de los años ’70, Delbert África le había avisado de una peligrosa trampa. Le explicó que el problema reside en que muchos de estos presos estudian la ley, creen en la ley, creen que se aplica a ellos, y cuando se dan cuenta que el Sistema no sigue sus propias leyes, que al contrario, la ley se hace y se rompe al antojo de los jueces, se vuelven locos.
Mumia afirma haber conocido unos presos vueltos locos precisamente por esta razón. También ha conocido unos que han abusado de los presos que representan. Sin embargo, el límite más fuerte que él señala es la insuficiencia de sus buenos esfuerzos para lograr cambios fundamentales en el sistema carcelario. Para acabar con este sistema, cualquier esfuerzo para utilizar la ley contra el poder tiene que ser parte de amplios movimientos dentro y fuera de las prisiones para transformar la sociedad.
Humilde, como siempre, Mumia apenas menciona sus propios esfuerzos como abogado autodidacta que ha ayudado a otros presos salir de prisión. Uno de ellos es Harold Wilson, quien ha escogido el nombre Amin y ahora participa en la campaña para liberar a Mumia. Fue uno de los invitados a hablar en el evento del 24 de abril en la ciudad de Nueva York.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Mumia Birthday/US PP Amnesty at Geneva Conference!
via sister marpessa kupenda (nattyreb@gmail.com):
(Many thanks to Strong Bro. Sourakhata for making these images "user friendly" so i could resend them out :-)
via: fkaba@freesurf.fr
Marianne BALLE (germany) coordinates the drafting comitteefanta
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362869444.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362869446.jpg
via: Bro. Sourakhata
Here are also some photos that I've taken just last week. It was a demonstration in Paris organized by the French Defense Committee of Mumia for his birthday & to protest against the fact the brother has been denied a new trial:
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362350822.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362350829.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362351128.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362351133.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362870978.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362870971.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362871580.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362871576.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362870978.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362871580.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362872050.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362872059.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362873298.jpg
They've been rallying in Place de la Concorde in Paris (just near the US Embassy & France Presidential Palace) every wednesday since 1996.
(Many thanks to Strong Bro. Sourakhata for making these images "user friendly" so i could resend them out :-)
via: fkaba@freesurf.fr
Marianne BALLE (germany) coordinates the drafting comitteefanta
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362869444.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362869446.jpg
via: Bro. Sourakhata
Here are also some photos that I've taken just last week. It was a demonstration in Paris organized by the French Defense Committee of Mumia for his birthday & to protest against the fact the brother has been denied a new trial:
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362350822.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362350829.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362351128.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362351133.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362870978.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362870971.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362871580.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362871576.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362870978.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362871580.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362872050.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362872059.jpg
http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL172/9333837/17081994/362873298.jpg
They've been rallying in Place de la Concorde in Paris (just near the US Embassy & France Presidential Palace) every wednesday since 1996.
PLANNING MEETING FOR EMERGENCY RALLY FOR MUMIA
This Friday, May 1st, there will be a planning meeting for our May 8th emergency rally for Mumia (at the Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. State Office Building at 4 PM). We are calling on our New York City elected officials to speak out at this moment of peril for Mumia. There has been a deafening silence. Please come to this important planning meeting so that we can turn out the largest number of people possible on the 8th.
Come with your ideas and commitments on outreach and media work!
The meeting will be held at 7 PM at St. Mary's Church, 521 West 126th Street, between Broadway and Amsterdam.
We need your help!
The Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition
Come with your ideas and commitments on outreach and media work!
The meeting will be held at 7 PM at St. Mary's Church, 521 West 126th Street, between Broadway and Amsterdam.
We need your help!
The Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
VIDEO: Angela Davis Speaks for Mumia Abu-Jamal, May 8 Rally for Mumia in Harlem
VIDEO: Angela Davis Speaks for Mumia Abu-Jamal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkoAwPRiRfI
http://www.abu-jamal-news.com/article.php?name=ayd
On April 24, in Oakland, CA, former political prisoner Angela Y. Davis spoke in support of death-row journalist Mumia Abu-Jamal, at an event marking Abu-Jamal's 55th birthday and the release of his new book: Jailhouse Lawyers: Prisoners Defending Prisoners v. The USA. Recently interviewed by The SF Bay View Newspaper, Davis wrote an introduction for Jailhouse Lawyers and she is also the author of Are Prisons Obsolete?.
On April 6, 2009, the US Supreme Court rejected Mumia Abu-Jamal's appeal for a new guilt-phase trial. In response, Abu-Jamal will be filing a "petition for re-hearing" by the end of April. The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to consider the Philadelphia DA's separate appeal, through which, the DA wants to execute Mumia WITHOUT a new sentencing hearing.
Please read the SF Bay View Newspaper report for more information, and be sure to sign the ONLINE PETITION.
As reported by The Philadelphia Inquirer and UPI, supporters are calling for intervention by the US Justice Department. Please contact the White House online, by phone: (202) 456-1111, and at FreeMumia.com.
WE CALL ON OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO SPEAK OUT ON THE THREATENED EXECUTION OF MUMIA ABU-JAMAL
Despite mounds of evidence of his innocence, and ample legal basis for overturning his conviction, and after 27 years of police, prosecutorial, and judicial misconduct, Mumia has been denied a new trial by the US Supreme Court. He now faces execution or life in prison without parole. All indications are that the Attorney General of Philadelphia, the Fraternal Order of Police, and the media supporters of both will be relentless in continuing to seek Mumia's execution. We are demanding that Attorney General Eric Holder conduct a civil rights investigation of this case based on the ongoing conspiracy to deny Mumia his constitutional rights. Go to www.freemumia.com to sign this letter. Our elected officials must actively support this campaign!
FRIDAY MAY 8TH
4 -6 PM
ADAM CLAYTON POWELL, JR. STATE OFFICE BUILDING (Harlem State Office Building)
163 West 125th Street
COMMUNITY MEETING WILL FOLLOW AT ST. MARY'S CHURCH
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition, International Action Center/Millions for Mumia, Harlem Tenants Council
For more information: Hotline: 212 330-8029 or www.freemumia.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkoAwPRiRfI
http://www.abu-jamal-news.com/article.php?name=ayd
On April 24, in Oakland, CA, former political prisoner Angela Y. Davis spoke in support of death-row journalist Mumia Abu-Jamal, at an event marking Abu-Jamal's 55th birthday and the release of his new book: Jailhouse Lawyers: Prisoners Defending Prisoners v. The USA. Recently interviewed by The SF Bay View Newspaper, Davis wrote an introduction for Jailhouse Lawyers and she is also the author of Are Prisons Obsolete?.
On April 6, 2009, the US Supreme Court rejected Mumia Abu-Jamal's appeal for a new guilt-phase trial. In response, Abu-Jamal will be filing a "petition for re-hearing" by the end of April. The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to consider the Philadelphia DA's separate appeal, through which, the DA wants to execute Mumia WITHOUT a new sentencing hearing.
Please read the SF Bay View Newspaper report for more information, and be sure to sign the ONLINE PETITION.
As reported by The Philadelphia Inquirer and UPI, supporters are calling for intervention by the US Justice Department. Please contact the White House online, by phone: (202) 456-1111, and at FreeMumia.com.
WE CALL ON OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO SPEAK OUT ON THE THREATENED EXECUTION OF MUMIA ABU-JAMAL
Despite mounds of evidence of his innocence, and ample legal basis for overturning his conviction, and after 27 years of police, prosecutorial, and judicial misconduct, Mumia has been denied a new trial by the US Supreme Court. He now faces execution or life in prison without parole. All indications are that the Attorney General of Philadelphia, the Fraternal Order of Police, and the media supporters of both will be relentless in continuing to seek Mumia's execution. We are demanding that Attorney General Eric Holder conduct a civil rights investigation of this case based on the ongoing conspiracy to deny Mumia his constitutional rights. Go to www.freemumia.com to sign this letter. Our elected officials must actively support this campaign!
FRIDAY MAY 8TH
4 -6 PM
ADAM CLAYTON POWELL, JR. STATE OFFICE BUILDING (Harlem State Office Building)
163 West 125th Street
COMMUNITY MEETING WILL FOLLOW AT ST. MARY'S CHURCH
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition, International Action Center/Millions for Mumia, Harlem Tenants Council
For more information: Hotline: 212 330-8029 or www.freemumia.com
Saturday, April 25, 2009
In Her Own Words: An interview wit' Angela Davis
via: Greg Ruggiero
Source: The Liberator Magazine
http://weblog.liberatormagazine.com/2009/04/in-her-own-words-interview-wit-angela.html
[2-day liberatormagazine.com featured story]
JR Valrey is the Minister of Information for the Prisoners Of Conscience Committee, an Oakland based organization founded by Fred Hampton, Jr. with the mission to liberate the minds and hearts of African and colonized people. The POCC takes the stand that all prisoners are political. JR is a regular contributor to The Liberator.
In Her Own Words. An interview wit' Angela Davis: Angela Davis is a legendary political activist professor in the U.C. System who has a history of resistance. She is a former political prisoner who has done work with the Communist Party, and she is also author of 8 books analyzing race, class, and gender. She also is a cofounder of the prison abolitionist group, Critical Resistance. She recently wrote a foreword to political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal's new book “Jailhouse Lawyers”, in which the Block Report did an interview with her to help promote.
I was first taught about Angela Davis being a political prisoner, later on the first jailhouse lawyer that I met through the mail was her codefendant who is still locked up, Ruchell Magee, whom I used to write occasionally. So this book gave me a better insight into what life as a jailhouse lawyer really is like. I dug the fact that Mumia picked a subject that is rarely discussed on this side of the walls. I learned a lot and it wet my appetite to wanting to learn more about these legal warriors. Check out Angela Davis as she talks about her foreword in Mumia's new book, in her own words...
M.O.I. JR: I want to talk to you today about your foreword in Mumia Abu Jamal's new book, Jailhouse Lawyers. Since I know a lot of readers do not have the book, I want to start off with reading a few quotes, and I will ask you questions in relation to the quotes. You say in your foreword, “Mumia points to me what was for me a startling revelation. Jailhouse lawyers comprised the group most likely to be punished by the prison administration, more so than political prisoners, Black people, gang members, and gay prisoners whereas jailhouse layers are punished by what Mumia calls 'cover charges'. Historically they could be charged with internal violations for no other reason that they used the law to challenge prison guards, prison regimes, and prison conditions. In your opinion what is the importance of Mumia choosing jailhouse lawyers to be the subject for his new book?
Angela: Well first of all, this is an amazing book. Everyone should read this book. And I was extremely excited to learn that he was working on a book on jailhouse lawyers because the story of jailhouse lawyers is a hidden story. Most people in this country are not aware of the extent to which resistance to the regimes of prisons, state prisons, federal prisons all over the country, has been shaped through the work of jailhouse lawyers. There is a long tradition of resistance. And Mumia, himself, is a jailhouse lawyer. And if one thinks about how many men and women have used the law in order to challenge the prison regimes, one gets a sense of what a powerful legacy that resistance is.
M.O.I. JR: In another quote in your foreword you say, “Mumia argues that the passage of the Prison Litigation Reform Act is a violation of the Convention Against Torture for in ruling out psychological or mental injury as a basis to recover damages such sexual coercion that was represented in the Abu Ghraib photographs if perpetrated inside of a U.S. prison, would not have constituted evidence for a lawsuit. Why did you point this out in your foreword?
Angela: Many people assume that the the P.L.R.A., the Prison Litigation Reform Act, as I tried to point out in the foreword, simply prevents prisoners from engaging in frivolous lawsuits. But as Mumia points out, it is a pointed attack on the capacity of prisoners to use the law itself. It is not about frivolity at all, it is about taking away from prisoners one of the only instruments that they've been able to develop to challenge the whole system. So we can't assume that under the Clinton administration the P.L.R.A. was passed, and that put prison lawsuits to rest. It's important for those of us on the outside to support the rights of prisoners to use the law to resist the violence of the state.
M.O.I. JR: Again to quote you, you say in the foreword of Jailhouse Lawyers, “The way he situates the P.L.R.A. historically as an inheritance of the Black Codes, which were themselves descended from the Slave Codes, allows to recognize the extent to which historical memories of slavery and racism are prescribed in the very structures of the prison system, and have helped to produce the Prison Industrial Complex.” Can you discuss the importance of Mumia making this connection in Jailhouse Lawyers?
Angela: Well this is one of the things that I really loved about Mumia, he knows how to make these historical connections. He makes connections with what might appear to be very dispirit and different kinds of phenomenon, for example he points out that the P.L.R.A. was passed at the same time as the disestablishment of the welfare system, and that there is a connection between preventing women primarily from having access to safety nets for their families, and this assault on prisoners being able to defend themselves. So I really like the way that he makes those connections with slavery. I think of the prison system today in this country, and especially the system of capital punishment, I think of it as a historical memory of slavery, as a palpable inheritance of slavery. And as a matter of fact, the existence of those systems provide us with real evidence of the fact that slavery was not fully abolished. So I like the way in which he can show us the similarities between the Black Codes, that were produced in the aftermath of slavery to basically replicate the system of slavery after slavery was allegedly abolished. And the P.R.L.A. serves a similar contemporary purpose.
M.O.I. JR: Again, you write in Jailhouse Lawyers, in the last sentence, “He (Mumia), allows us to reflect on the fact that transformational possibilities often emerge where we least expect them.” Why did you end your foreword with that statement in this book?
Angela: Well you know because people don't usually think of prisoners in general as defending democracy. They think of the prison as the underside, the underbelly, of democracy; as the place where you send people who no longer have the right to be citizens. But I think that what Mumia does, he manages to portray jailhouse lawyers in such a ways as to persuade us regardless of what our political persuasions might be, the jailhouse lawyers have been, in a sense, on the front line of the defense of democracy. I'm not talking about capitalists democracy. I'm not talking about neo-liberal democracy. I'm talking about the kind of democracy that would also tend to not only political equality, but racial equality, economic equality, and sexual equality as well.
M.O.I. JR: What is the importance of us recognizing that Mumia is facing deathrow right at this second, right when he released such an eloquent book on jailhouse lawyers? You also pointed out in this foreword that he rarely speaks of himself, so in the midst of this being a time of the first Black president of America, what does Mumia's imprisonment, with all the flaws in his case, say about the real political climate in America?
Angela: Well, first of all, Mumia's case is so important for us to get involved in. We have to save his life. We have to free Mumia. And yeah, as many people acknowledge he rarely uses his amazing talent and capacities to advocate for himself. He's always advocating for others, and that is all the more reason to be passionate advocates for him. I have traveled in other parts of the world a great deal, and there are movements to free Mumia all over the world. Sometimes I feel very embarrassed that we have not managed to overcome the power of the Fraternal Order of Police for example and the other conservative forces that are determined to put Mumia to death. But this book is yet another reason why we need to defend him, and why we need to use whatever is available to us, whatever knowledge, whatever instruments are available to us to guarantee that his life is saved and that he is eventually set free.
Excerpts from Mumia's book Jailhouse Lawyers, including Angela Y. Davis's complete foreword can be downloaded as a PDF for free from the City Lights Web site.
http://www.citylights.com/book/?GCOI=87286100448090&fa=complements
Source: The Liberator Magazine
http://weblog.liberatormagazine.com/2009/04/in-her-own-words-interview-wit-angela.html
[2-day liberatormagazine.com featured story]
JR Valrey is the Minister of Information for the Prisoners Of Conscience Committee, an Oakland based organization founded by Fred Hampton, Jr. with the mission to liberate the minds and hearts of African and colonized people. The POCC takes the stand that all prisoners are political. JR is a regular contributor to The Liberator.
In Her Own Words. An interview wit' Angela Davis: Angela Davis is a legendary political activist professor in the U.C. System who has a history of resistance. She is a former political prisoner who has done work with the Communist Party, and she is also author of 8 books analyzing race, class, and gender. She also is a cofounder of the prison abolitionist group, Critical Resistance. She recently wrote a foreword to political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal's new book “Jailhouse Lawyers”, in which the Block Report did an interview with her to help promote.
I was first taught about Angela Davis being a political prisoner, later on the first jailhouse lawyer that I met through the mail was her codefendant who is still locked up, Ruchell Magee, whom I used to write occasionally. So this book gave me a better insight into what life as a jailhouse lawyer really is like. I dug the fact that Mumia picked a subject that is rarely discussed on this side of the walls. I learned a lot and it wet my appetite to wanting to learn more about these legal warriors. Check out Angela Davis as she talks about her foreword in Mumia's new book, in her own words...
M.O.I. JR: I want to talk to you today about your foreword in Mumia Abu Jamal's new book, Jailhouse Lawyers. Since I know a lot of readers do not have the book, I want to start off with reading a few quotes, and I will ask you questions in relation to the quotes. You say in your foreword, “Mumia points to me what was for me a startling revelation. Jailhouse lawyers comprised the group most likely to be punished by the prison administration, more so than political prisoners, Black people, gang members, and gay prisoners whereas jailhouse layers are punished by what Mumia calls 'cover charges'. Historically they could be charged with internal violations for no other reason that they used the law to challenge prison guards, prison regimes, and prison conditions. In your opinion what is the importance of Mumia choosing jailhouse lawyers to be the subject for his new book?
Angela: Well first of all, this is an amazing book. Everyone should read this book. And I was extremely excited to learn that he was working on a book on jailhouse lawyers because the story of jailhouse lawyers is a hidden story. Most people in this country are not aware of the extent to which resistance to the regimes of prisons, state prisons, federal prisons all over the country, has been shaped through the work of jailhouse lawyers. There is a long tradition of resistance. And Mumia, himself, is a jailhouse lawyer. And if one thinks about how many men and women have used the law in order to challenge the prison regimes, one gets a sense of what a powerful legacy that resistance is.
M.O.I. JR: In another quote in your foreword you say, “Mumia argues that the passage of the Prison Litigation Reform Act is a violation of the Convention Against Torture for in ruling out psychological or mental injury as a basis to recover damages such sexual coercion that was represented in the Abu Ghraib photographs if perpetrated inside of a U.S. prison, would not have constituted evidence for a lawsuit. Why did you point this out in your foreword?
Angela: Many people assume that the the P.L.R.A., the Prison Litigation Reform Act, as I tried to point out in the foreword, simply prevents prisoners from engaging in frivolous lawsuits. But as Mumia points out, it is a pointed attack on the capacity of prisoners to use the law itself. It is not about frivolity at all, it is about taking away from prisoners one of the only instruments that they've been able to develop to challenge the whole system. So we can't assume that under the Clinton administration the P.L.R.A. was passed, and that put prison lawsuits to rest. It's important for those of us on the outside to support the rights of prisoners to use the law to resist the violence of the state.
M.O.I. JR: Again to quote you, you say in the foreword of Jailhouse Lawyers, “The way he situates the P.L.R.A. historically as an inheritance of the Black Codes, which were themselves descended from the Slave Codes, allows to recognize the extent to which historical memories of slavery and racism are prescribed in the very structures of the prison system, and have helped to produce the Prison Industrial Complex.” Can you discuss the importance of Mumia making this connection in Jailhouse Lawyers?
Angela: Well this is one of the things that I really loved about Mumia, he knows how to make these historical connections. He makes connections with what might appear to be very dispirit and different kinds of phenomenon, for example he points out that the P.L.R.A. was passed at the same time as the disestablishment of the welfare system, and that there is a connection between preventing women primarily from having access to safety nets for their families, and this assault on prisoners being able to defend themselves. So I really like the way that he makes those connections with slavery. I think of the prison system today in this country, and especially the system of capital punishment, I think of it as a historical memory of slavery, as a palpable inheritance of slavery. And as a matter of fact, the existence of those systems provide us with real evidence of the fact that slavery was not fully abolished. So I like the way in which he can show us the similarities between the Black Codes, that were produced in the aftermath of slavery to basically replicate the system of slavery after slavery was allegedly abolished. And the P.R.L.A. serves a similar contemporary purpose.
M.O.I. JR: Again, you write in Jailhouse Lawyers, in the last sentence, “He (Mumia), allows us to reflect on the fact that transformational possibilities often emerge where we least expect them.” Why did you end your foreword with that statement in this book?
Angela: Well you know because people don't usually think of prisoners in general as defending democracy. They think of the prison as the underside, the underbelly, of democracy; as the place where you send people who no longer have the right to be citizens. But I think that what Mumia does, he manages to portray jailhouse lawyers in such a ways as to persuade us regardless of what our political persuasions might be, the jailhouse lawyers have been, in a sense, on the front line of the defense of democracy. I'm not talking about capitalists democracy. I'm not talking about neo-liberal democracy. I'm talking about the kind of democracy that would also tend to not only political equality, but racial equality, economic equality, and sexual equality as well.
M.O.I. JR: What is the importance of us recognizing that Mumia is facing deathrow right at this second, right when he released such an eloquent book on jailhouse lawyers? You also pointed out in this foreword that he rarely speaks of himself, so in the midst of this being a time of the first Black president of America, what does Mumia's imprisonment, with all the flaws in his case, say about the real political climate in America?
Angela: Well, first of all, Mumia's case is so important for us to get involved in. We have to save his life. We have to free Mumia. And yeah, as many people acknowledge he rarely uses his amazing talent and capacities to advocate for himself. He's always advocating for others, and that is all the more reason to be passionate advocates for him. I have traveled in other parts of the world a great deal, and there are movements to free Mumia all over the world. Sometimes I feel very embarrassed that we have not managed to overcome the power of the Fraternal Order of Police for example and the other conservative forces that are determined to put Mumia to death. But this book is yet another reason why we need to defend him, and why we need to use whatever is available to us, whatever knowledge, whatever instruments are available to us to guarantee that his life is saved and that he is eventually set free.
##
Excerpts from Mumia's book Jailhouse Lawyers, including Angela Y. Davis's complete foreword can be downloaded as a PDF for free from the City Lights Web site.
http://www.citylights.com/book/?GCOI=87286100448090&fa=complements
FREE MUMIA!
Write the Department of Justice for a Civil Rights Investigation on Mumia's case
Write to Attorney General Eric Holder demanding that he immediately initiate a civil rights investigation addressing a 27-year history of prosecutorial and judicial violations of Mumia Abu-Jamal's constitutional and international rights. If the Justice Department can guarantee justice for Senator Ted Stevens, it should do the same for noted journalist and multiple-award recipient, and international honoree Mumia Abu-Jamal. Demand that your elected officials endorse this campaign!
Initiated by the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION AT http://www.iacenter.org/mumiapetition
On April 6, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Mumia's appeal for a new trial based on evidence of racist jury selection on the part of the prosecutor during the original 1982 trial in Philadelphia. This appeal was based on the 1986 U.S. Supreme Court "Batson decision", a legal decision that says that prospective jurors cannot be selected based on their race.
This issue was considered the strongest basis for overturning Mumia's conviction, though certainly not the only one. According to Amnesty International's detailed review of the case, Mumia was denied at his trial in 1982 the right to a fair judge and unbiased jury, the right to represent himself and the right to adequate resources to prepare his defense. In addition, the prosecution withheld critical evidence from the defense, judge and jury; suborned the perjury of its chief witness; and intimidated at least one other witness to perjure herself. Since the AI report, more evidence has emerged of an ongoing conspiracy by the prosecution and members of the judiciary to keep out of the legal record evidence that points to Mumia's innocence. At the very least, this evidence indicates serious misconduct on the part of the prosecution and judiciary. It was precisely this kind of misconduct that led to the overturning, just two weeks ago, of the conviction of Senator Ted Stevens.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals' rejection of Mumia's appeal on the basis of the "Batson decision" shocked many legal observers, as the court set new and higher standards of appeal in complete violation of its own precedents. One of the members of the three-judge panel that arrived at this decision wrote a scathing 41-page dissent pointing to how Mumia was not granted the same rights that previous appellants were given by this very same court.
Please take a few minutes to read, sign and circulate widely the important letter below to Attorney General Eric Holder. Send copies to other officials demanding that they, too, demand a civil rights investigation. Only a powerful, international campaign can win long-overdue freedom for this outspoken, award-winning journalist and stop a 27-year-old conspiracy to silence him with legal lynching or life in prison without parole. Both options are outrageous violations of Mumia's human and constitutional rights, and we will not allow them to stand. Mumia needs our movement and our movement needs Mumia.
SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION AT http://www.iacenter.org/mumiapetition
US Department of Justice
Washington, DC
April 2009
To Eric Holder, US Attorney General:
We write to you with a sense of grave concern and outrage about the US Supreme Court's denial of a hearing to Mumia Abu-Jamal on the issue of racial bias in jury selection, that is, the "Batson issue". Inasmuch as there is no other court to which Abu-Jamal can appeal for justice, we turn to you for remedy of a 27- year history of gross violations of US constitutional law and international standards of justice as documented by Amnesty International and many other legal groups around the world.
We call on you and the Justice Department to immediately commence a civil rights investigation to examine the many examples of egregious and racist prosecutorial and judicial misconduct dating back to the original trial in 1982 and continuing through to the current inaction of the US Supreme Court. The statute of limitations should not be a factor in this case as there is very strong evidence of an ongoing conspiracy to deny Abu-Jamal his constitutional rights.
We are aware of the many differences that exist between the case of former Senator Ted Stevens and Mumia Abu-Jamal. Still, we note with great interest the actions you have taken with regard to Senator Stevens' conviction to assure that he not be denied his constitutional rights. You were specifically outraged by the fact that the prosecution withheld information critical to the defense's argument for acquittal, a violation clearly committed by the prosecution in Abu-Jamal's case. Mumia Abu-Jamal, though not a US senator of great wealth and power, is a Black man revered around the world for his courage, clarity, and commitment and deserves no less than Senator Stevens.
Cordially,
(Your signature will be appended here based on the contact information you enter in the online form)
SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION AT http://www.iacenter.org/mumiapetition
International Campaign for Justice for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Sponsored by:
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
P.O. Box 16, College Station
New York, N.Y. 10030
(212) 330-8029
www.freemumia.com
International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Philadelphia, PA
www.freemumia.com
(215) 476-8812
Millions for Mumia
www.millions4mumia.org
International Action Center
www.iacenter.org
c/o Solidarity Center
55 West 17th St 5C
New York, NY 10011
For further information call: (212) 633-6646
Initiated by the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION AT http://www.iacenter.org/mumiapetition
On April 6, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Mumia's appeal for a new trial based on evidence of racist jury selection on the part of the prosecutor during the original 1982 trial in Philadelphia. This appeal was based on the 1986 U.S. Supreme Court "Batson decision", a legal decision that says that prospective jurors cannot be selected based on their race.
This issue was considered the strongest basis for overturning Mumia's conviction, though certainly not the only one. According to Amnesty International's detailed review of the case, Mumia was denied at his trial in 1982 the right to a fair judge and unbiased jury, the right to represent himself and the right to adequate resources to prepare his defense. In addition, the prosecution withheld critical evidence from the defense, judge and jury; suborned the perjury of its chief witness; and intimidated at least one other witness to perjure herself. Since the AI report, more evidence has emerged of an ongoing conspiracy by the prosecution and members of the judiciary to keep out of the legal record evidence that points to Mumia's innocence. At the very least, this evidence indicates serious misconduct on the part of the prosecution and judiciary. It was precisely this kind of misconduct that led to the overturning, just two weeks ago, of the conviction of Senator Ted Stevens.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals' rejection of Mumia's appeal on the basis of the "Batson decision" shocked many legal observers, as the court set new and higher standards of appeal in complete violation of its own precedents. One of the members of the three-judge panel that arrived at this decision wrote a scathing 41-page dissent pointing to how Mumia was not granted the same rights that previous appellants were given by this very same court.
Please take a few minutes to read, sign and circulate widely the important letter below to Attorney General Eric Holder. Send copies to other officials demanding that they, too, demand a civil rights investigation. Only a powerful, international campaign can win long-overdue freedom for this outspoken, award-winning journalist and stop a 27-year-old conspiracy to silence him with legal lynching or life in prison without parole. Both options are outrageous violations of Mumia's human and constitutional rights, and we will not allow them to stand. Mumia needs our movement and our movement needs Mumia.
SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION AT http://www.iacenter.org/mumiapetition
US Department of Justice
Washington, DC
April 2009
To Eric Holder, US Attorney General:
We write to you with a sense of grave concern and outrage about the US Supreme Court's denial of a hearing to Mumia Abu-Jamal on the issue of racial bias in jury selection, that is, the "Batson issue". Inasmuch as there is no other court to which Abu-Jamal can appeal for justice, we turn to you for remedy of a 27- year history of gross violations of US constitutional law and international standards of justice as documented by Amnesty International and many other legal groups around the world.
We call on you and the Justice Department to immediately commence a civil rights investigation to examine the many examples of egregious and racist prosecutorial and judicial misconduct dating back to the original trial in 1982 and continuing through to the current inaction of the US Supreme Court. The statute of limitations should not be a factor in this case as there is very strong evidence of an ongoing conspiracy to deny Abu-Jamal his constitutional rights.
We are aware of the many differences that exist between the case of former Senator Ted Stevens and Mumia Abu-Jamal. Still, we note with great interest the actions you have taken with regard to Senator Stevens' conviction to assure that he not be denied his constitutional rights. You were specifically outraged by the fact that the prosecution withheld information critical to the defense's argument for acquittal, a violation clearly committed by the prosecution in Abu-Jamal's case. Mumia Abu-Jamal, though not a US senator of great wealth and power, is a Black man revered around the world for his courage, clarity, and commitment and deserves no less than Senator Stevens.
Cordially,
(Your signature will be appended here based on the contact information you enter in the online form)
SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION AT http://www.iacenter.org/mumiapetition
International Campaign for Justice for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Sponsored by:
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
P.O. Box 16, College Station
New York, N.Y. 10030
(212) 330-8029
www.freemumia.com
International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Philadelphia, PA
www.freemumia.com
(215) 476-8812
Millions for Mumia
www.millions4mumia.org
International Action Center
www.iacenter.org
c/o Solidarity Center
55 West 17th St 5C
New York, NY 10011
For further information call: (212) 633-6646
The Free Mumia Five Point Plan
via: concerned.migrants@gmail.com + The Black List
The Free Mumia Five Point Plan
If Not Now, When?
By U-Savior
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator
http://www.blackcommentator.com/320/320_free_mumia_if_not_now_when_usavior_guest.html
Instead of bailing Out Mega Corporations that have sucked the life blood from the community, endorsed slavery, raided pensions, decimated savings, created the perfect environment for scams and put home owners, renters and their families out on the street - FREE MUMIA!
The Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, handed George W. Bush the election despite the democratic popular vote to the contrary and as a direct result of that court's decision we witnessed the erosion of civil liberties, scandals, torture and illegal wars that have killed hundreds of thousands. The world suffered greatly. Today this same court will not hear the case of Mumia Abu Jamal, an innocent man who has served over 25 years in prison on death row- in effect letting his conviction stand. This is not surprising! But this IS outrageous! This is disrespectful not only to Justice everywhere but to the Black Community in particular. What are we going to do about it? Um...here’s a thought:
The Free Mumia Five Point Plan:
1. Tell Your Mama AND Obama: To all the supporters of the Obama Administration: make this a central issue. If he's unwilling FORCE him to use every ounce of his reach and influence from presidential pardons to civil and human rights investigations to demand justice. Challenge his position and prepare to expose to the world where the real power is.
2. Shame Weak Leadership: Those in “leadership” in the Black community who do not step up to fight, speak, write, divest, protest, ignite, bite, spit and curse, throw stares and misbehave on behalf of our brother should be shown the door. Forever!
3. The Symbol: To my friends and family connected to street tribes: Let Mumia be your flag and symbol for a real political, social and positive movement that turns necessary attention back to Mumia's plight.
4. One Hour Pledge: If every justice-loving, peace-seeking , freedom-fighting, consciousness-bringing individual pledges and dedicates at least one hour every day to fight, speak, write, divest, protest, ignite, bite, spit and curse, throw stares and misbehave, we can shake up this world and shake Mumia free from those cold white walls, steel doors and shackles.
5. Promise to never Say "I’ve done enough": It’s not enough that in every Ghetto Chronicles episode that I direct that I place a promo about the Mumia coalition.
It’s not enough that every year I put his name on my Birthday cake because we share the same birthday.
It’s not enough that after every film I place a FREE MUMIA TAG!
It’s not enough that I wrote this article.
It’s not enough to say I wrote, visited or listen to Mumia on Prison Radio.
Never say we’ve done enough or we’ve done all we could until our true symbol of hope, change and justice is where we want him to be. Home, with us!
Let’s not forget that Mumia Abu Jamal has done more work from death row than many “inactivists”, movement folk and “webolutionaries” to bringing attention and clarity to our struggle than those outside of prison. Mumia was an activist, photographer and writer dedicated to real justice before being arrested and charged with the murder of a Philadelphia policeman. Mumia Abu Jamal like so many other political prisoners deserves our commitment. If we don’t take care of the best of us right here and right now it will send the wrong signal to activist all over the world. The fight for Mumia’s Justice and Freedom is a fight for our very own and a Fight we must win. IF NOT NOW, WHEN?
Revolution, then peace!
On The Move!
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator, U-Savior Washington, was born in Harlem and raised in East New York Brooklyn. U-Savior Washington is an author, video journalist and film director. He is the executive producer of The Ghetto Chronicles hosted by Nana Soul and the director of the documentary film “Confessions of a Liberal Actor-vist” which is distributed by Black Waxx Multimedia, http://www.blackwaxx.com/.
The Free Mumia Five Point Plan
If Not Now, When?
By U-Savior
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator
http://www.blackcommentator.com/320/320_free_mumia_if_not_now_when_usavior_guest.html
Instead of bailing Out Mega Corporations that have sucked the life blood from the community, endorsed slavery, raided pensions, decimated savings, created the perfect environment for scams and put home owners, renters and their families out on the street - FREE MUMIA!
The Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, handed George W. Bush the election despite the democratic popular vote to the contrary and as a direct result of that court's decision we witnessed the erosion of civil liberties, scandals, torture and illegal wars that have killed hundreds of thousands. The world suffered greatly. Today this same court will not hear the case of Mumia Abu Jamal, an innocent man who has served over 25 years in prison on death row- in effect letting his conviction stand. This is not surprising! But this IS outrageous! This is disrespectful not only to Justice everywhere but to the Black Community in particular. What are we going to do about it? Um...here’s a thought:
The Free Mumia Five Point Plan:
1. Tell Your Mama AND Obama: To all the supporters of the Obama Administration: make this a central issue. If he's unwilling FORCE him to use every ounce of his reach and influence from presidential pardons to civil and human rights investigations to demand justice. Challenge his position and prepare to expose to the world where the real power is.
2. Shame Weak Leadership: Those in “leadership” in the Black community who do not step up to fight, speak, write, divest, protest, ignite, bite, spit and curse, throw stares and misbehave on behalf of our brother should be shown the door. Forever!
3. The Symbol: To my friends and family connected to street tribes: Let Mumia be your flag and symbol for a real political, social and positive movement that turns necessary attention back to Mumia's plight.
4. One Hour Pledge: If every justice-loving, peace-seeking , freedom-fighting, consciousness-bringing individual pledges and dedicates at least one hour every day to fight, speak, write, divest, protest, ignite, bite, spit and curse, throw stares and misbehave, we can shake up this world and shake Mumia free from those cold white walls, steel doors and shackles.
5. Promise to never Say "I’ve done enough": It’s not enough that in every Ghetto Chronicles episode that I direct that I place a promo about the Mumia coalition.
It’s not enough that every year I put his name on my Birthday cake because we share the same birthday.
It’s not enough that after every film I place a FREE MUMIA TAG!
It’s not enough that I wrote this article.
It’s not enough to say I wrote, visited or listen to Mumia on Prison Radio.
Never say we’ve done enough or we’ve done all we could until our true symbol of hope, change and justice is where we want him to be. Home, with us!
Let’s not forget that Mumia Abu Jamal has done more work from death row than many “inactivists”, movement folk and “webolutionaries” to bringing attention and clarity to our struggle than those outside of prison. Mumia was an activist, photographer and writer dedicated to real justice before being arrested and charged with the murder of a Philadelphia policeman. Mumia Abu Jamal like so many other political prisoners deserves our commitment. If we don’t take care of the best of us right here and right now it will send the wrong signal to activist all over the world. The fight for Mumia’s Justice and Freedom is a fight for our very own and a Fight we must win. IF NOT NOW, WHEN?
Revolution, then peace!
On The Move!
BlackCommentator.com Guest Commentator, U-Savior Washington, was born in Harlem and raised in East New York Brooklyn. U-Savior Washington is an author, video journalist and film director. He is the executive producer of The Ghetto Chronicles hosted by Nana Soul and the director of the documentary film “Confessions of a Liberal Actor-vist” which is distributed by Black Waxx Multimedia, http://www.blackwaxx.com/.
!Mexico City Activists Use Obama Visit to Fight for Mumia!
Hey all,
yesterday we improvised a small action in support of Mumia that got a fair amount of mainstream radio coverage. Obama is here, visiting with Calderón, and we went to the National Auditorium, right by the gates of Campo Marte, the military camp where his helicopter landed to deliver a letter urging him to take a stand for justice and freedom in the case of Mumia and other pps. Of course they didn't let us in to deliver the letter, and who knows if Obama will ever find out we were there, but we put it up on the independent media sites and did get an abbreviated version in the "letters to the editor" section of the mainstream, semi-leftist La Jornada newspaper. There's been so much hype in the press for the last week about all the heavy duty security measures that it was hard to figure out where we could be, or if were were going to be able to get through the police /military lines at all. And all the propaganda about 6,000 police and soldiers, sharpshooters, helicopters, searches of anyone in the zone, etc. definitely had a chilling effect on the turnout. There were only thirteen of us, but to our surprise, the access was pretty easy, and we got a kick out of it because the press never comes to our demonstrations, but today we got there early and they were hanging around waiting for Obama, so they all came over to talk to us. As we pretty much expected, the mainsteam tv stations and newspapers ended up doing official promo, but for a while some of our interviews were buzzing around on the radio stations. So we ended up feeling pretty good about it. Will send some pics as soon as I get them.
OnaMOVE
Here goes the English version of the letter, followed by the Spanish.
Dear President Obama:
On your first visit to Mexico, today April 16, we are writing to urge you to take a stand for justice and freedom in the case of political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal. It’s shameful that this acclaimed journalist and writer is still held in degrading, inhuman conditions on death row 27 years after his arrest on December 9, 1981! And it’s even more shameful that the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court of the United States, just broke its own precedents in its zeal to deny him the new trial he was seeking to establish his innocence in the killing of police officer Daniel Faulkner!
We are among hundreds of thousands of people in the world who share Mumia Abu-Jamal’s struggle for a better world. We greatly appreciate his weekly columns and the six books he’s written during his time on death row. We admire his dignity and steadfastness and want to see him free.
As of now, the Supreme Court has not responded to the District Attorney’s petition to reinstate the death penalty, thrown out in 2001 by federal Judge William Yohn, who ruled that it would be necessary to hold a sentencing hearing in the event that the DA moved to reinstate the death penalty. His ruling was sustained by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in May of 2008. But now the Philadelphia D. A. intends to kill him without even so much as a hearing, in collaboration with the Fraternal Order of Police and public officials who will only be satisfied with his head. What do you think about the threat of a modern-day lynching, President Obama?
President Obama, your victory was celebrated all over the world as a great step against racism, but as of yet, you haven’t denounced the fact that 41% of all the prisoners in the United States and 41.9% of those on death row are African Americans although they only represent 12.3% of the total population. Of all the political prisoners held in your country, over half are African Americans. In their political trials, racism was a major factor. This was definitely true in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal, where D. A. Joseph McGill used 10 of his 15 peremptory challenges to exclude black candidates from the jury, and where Judge Albert Sabo was overheard commenting to his clerk, “I’m going to help them fry the nigger”!
During your campaign, you promised to put an end to torture and civil rights violations. You also took a stand for the freedom of political prisoners in Burma, including that of political prisoner Aung San Suu Kyi. But we haven’t heard you utter a single word of support for Mumia Abu-Jamal or more than a hundred other political prisoners who have spent decades of torture, isolation, and denigrating conditions in the dungeons of your own country, condemned for their political activism. There they are-- Leonard Peltier, the MOVE 9, the San Francisco 8, the Angola 3, the Puerto Rican independence fighters, “los Cinco”, the anti-imperialists, the Chicano activists, the environmentalists, the animal rights defenders, and the opponents of the terrible School of the Americas, along with so many more. Neither have we heard you make a call for the freedom of more than 10,000 Palestinian political prisoners who endure constant torture in Israel’s extermination camps.
As a matter of fact, when the right wing columnist Michael Smerconish asked you about Mumia Abu-Jamal during your campaign, you said you didn’t know much about his case, but that anyone who kills a cop deserves the death penalty or life in prison. (Philadelphia Inquirer, October 10, 2008). Are we to believe that a defender of human rights like yourself knows little or nothing about the case of one of the most widely supported political prisoners in the world and is not aware of all the violations of his constitutional rights during his trial, which have been duly registered by a long list of human rights organizations, including Amnesty International?
Please don’t tell us that you agree with the political motives of the Fraternal Order of Police and politicians like Pennsylvania Governor Edward G. Rendell, District Attorney Lynn Abraham, and Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille. These public officials who incriminated Mumia Abu-Jamal of homicide are the very people who are still in power and block every attempt to achieve justice and freedom in his case. You couldn’t possible believe that his membership in the Black Panther Party in the ‘60s and his sympathy with the MOVE organization constitute a crime, could you?
President Obama, you have a great opportunity to act on behalf of justice and freedom for Mumia Abu-Jamal and all the political prisoners in your country. What do you intend to do?
Amig@s de Mumia, México
Estimado presidente Obama:
Aprovechamos su visita a México el 16 de abril, para instarle a pronunciarse por la justicia y libertad en el caso del preso político Mumia Abu- Jamal. Es vergonzoso que este aclamado periodista y escritor sigue en el corredor de la muerte 27 años después de su detención el 9 de diciembre de 1981, bajo condiciones inhumanas y denigrantes, y aún más vergonzoso que la corte más alta de la nación, la Suprema Corte de Estados Unidos, acaba de romper su propios precedentes en su afán de negarle un nuevo juicio para comprobar su inocencia en el asesinato del policía Daniel Faulkner.
Somos cientos de miles de personas en el mundo que compartimos la lucha de Mumia Abu-Jamal para un mundo mejor. Apreciamos sus columnas
semanales y los seis libros que él ha escrito desde el corredor de la muerte. Apreciamos su dignidad y congruencia, y queremos verlo libre.
Hasta la fecha, la Suprema Corte no ha respondido a la petición de la fiscalía para reimponer la pena de muerte, rechazada por el juez federal William Yohn en el 2001, quien había dictado que sería necesario celebrar una audiencia para determinar su sentencia en el evento de que la fiscalía quisiera reimponer la pena de muerte. Su dictamen fue avalado por el Tribunal Federal de Apelaciones del Tercer Circuito en mayo del 2008. Pero ahora la fiscalía de Filadelfia pretende ejecutarlo sin audiencia alguna con el respaldo del sindicato de policías y de las autoridades públicas que=2 0piden su cabeza. ¿Qué opina de la amenaza de un linchamiento moderno, presidente Obama?
Presidente Obama, su victoria fue celebrada en todas partes del mundo como un gran avance contra el racismo, pero hasta ahora usted no ha denunciado la situación de que 41% de todos los presos en Estados Unidos y 41.9% de los condenados a la muerte son africano-americanos aunque representan sólo 12.3% de la población total del país. De los presos políticos, más de la mitad son de la población africano-americana. En sus juicios políticos, el racismo fue un gran factor. Éste también fue el caso en el juicio de Mumia Abu-Jamal, en el cual el fiscal Joseph McGill usó 10 de sus 15 vetos perentorios para excluir a los candidatos negros del jurado y el juez Albert Sabo dijo: “Les voy a ayudar a freír el nigger”.
Durante su campaña electoral, usted se pronunció por un fin a los abusos de las libertades civiles y al régimen de tortura. También se pronunció por la libertad de los presos políticos de Burma, inclusive la presa política Aung San Suu Kyi. Pero no escuchamos una sola palabra suya en apoyo a Mumia Abu-Jamal o más de cien otros presos y presas políticos que han pasado décadas de tortura, aislamiento y condiciones denigrantes en las mazmorras de Estados Unidos, condenados por su activismo político. Ahí están Leonard Peltier, “los 9 de MOVE”, “los 8 de San Francisco”, “los 3 de Angola”, los independentistas puertorriqueños, “los 5 cubanos”, los anti-imperialistas, los activistas chicanos, los ecologistas, los defensores de animales, los opositores al terrible Escuela de las Américas, y tantos otros. Tampoco escuchamos un llamado suyo por la libertad de más de 10,000 presos políticos palestinos que aguantan las torturas en los campos de exterminación de Israel.
De hecho, cuando el columnista derechista Michael Smerconish le preguntó sobre Mumia Abu-Jamal durante su campaña, usted dijo que no sabía mucho sobre el caso, pero que “si alguien mata a un policía, él merece la pena de muerte o cadena perpetua” (Philadelphia Inquirer, 10 de octubre, 2008). ¿Debemos creer que un defensor de los derechos humanos no conozca el caso de uno de los presos políticos con mayor apoyo popular en el mundo y que no conozca las múltiples violaciones de derechos constitucionales en su proceso, señaladas por una larga lista de grupos de derechos humanos, inclusive Amnistía Internacional?
¿Usted está de acuerdo con los motivos políticos de la Organización Fraternal de Policía y de oficiales como el gobernador de Pennsylvania, Edward G. Rendell, la fiscal Lynn Abraham, y el juez principal de la Suprema Corte del estado de Pennsylvania, Ronald D. Castille para incriminar a Mumia Abu-Jamal del homicidio? Ellos son los que siguen en poder y obstaculizan cualquier esfuerzo para lograr justicia y libertad en su caso. O ¿a caso cree usted que su militancia en los Panteras Negras en los años ’60 y su simpatía con la organización MOVE constituyen un crimen?
Presidente Obama, usted tiene la gran oportunidad de promover justicia y libertad para Mumia Abu-Jamal y todos los presos políticos de su país. ¿Qué piensa hacer al respecto?
Amig@s de Mumia, México
yesterday we improvised a small action in support of Mumia that got a fair amount of mainstream radio coverage. Obama is here, visiting with Calderón, and we went to the National Auditorium, right by the gates of Campo Marte, the military camp where his helicopter landed to deliver a letter urging him to take a stand for justice and freedom in the case of Mumia and other pps. Of course they didn't let us in to deliver the letter, and who knows if Obama will ever find out we were there, but we put it up on the independent media sites and did get an abbreviated version in the "letters to the editor" section of the mainstream, semi-leftist La Jornada newspaper. There's been so much hype in the press for the last week about all the heavy duty security measures that it was hard to figure out where we could be, or if were were going to be able to get through the police /military lines at all. And all the propaganda about 6,000 police and soldiers, sharpshooters, helicopters, searches of anyone in the zone, etc. definitely had a chilling effect on the turnout. There were only thirteen of us, but to our surprise, the access was pretty easy, and we got a kick out of it because the press never comes to our demonstrations, but today we got there early and they were hanging around waiting for Obama, so they all came over to talk to us. As we pretty much expected, the mainsteam tv stations and newspapers ended up doing official promo, but for a while some of our interviews were buzzing around on the radio stations. So we ended up feeling pretty good about it. Will send some pics as soon as I get them.
OnaMOVE
Here goes the English version of the letter, followed by the Spanish.
Dear President Obama:
On your first visit to Mexico, today April 16, we are writing to urge you to take a stand for justice and freedom in the case of political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal. It’s shameful that this acclaimed journalist and writer is still held in degrading, inhuman conditions on death row 27 years after his arrest on December 9, 1981! And it’s even more shameful that the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court of the United States, just broke its own precedents in its zeal to deny him the new trial he was seeking to establish his innocence in the killing of police officer Daniel Faulkner!
We are among hundreds of thousands of people in the world who share Mumia Abu-Jamal’s struggle for a better world. We greatly appreciate his weekly columns and the six books he’s written during his time on death row. We admire his dignity and steadfastness and want to see him free.
As of now, the Supreme Court has not responded to the District Attorney’s petition to reinstate the death penalty, thrown out in 2001 by federal Judge William Yohn, who ruled that it would be necessary to hold a sentencing hearing in the event that the DA moved to reinstate the death penalty. His ruling was sustained by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in May of 2008. But now the Philadelphia D. A. intends to kill him without even so much as a hearing, in collaboration with the Fraternal Order of Police and public officials who will only be satisfied with his head. What do you think about the threat of a modern-day lynching, President Obama?
President Obama, your victory was celebrated all over the world as a great step against racism, but as of yet, you haven’t denounced the fact that 41% of all the prisoners in the United States and 41.9% of those on death row are African Americans although they only represent 12.3% of the total population. Of all the political prisoners held in your country, over half are African Americans. In their political trials, racism was a major factor. This was definitely true in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal, where D. A. Joseph McGill used 10 of his 15 peremptory challenges to exclude black candidates from the jury, and where Judge Albert Sabo was overheard commenting to his clerk, “I’m going to help them fry the nigger”!
During your campaign, you promised to put an end to torture and civil rights violations. You also took a stand for the freedom of political prisoners in Burma, including that of political prisoner Aung San Suu Kyi. But we haven’t heard you utter a single word of support for Mumia Abu-Jamal or more than a hundred other political prisoners who have spent decades of torture, isolation, and denigrating conditions in the dungeons of your own country, condemned for their political activism. There they are-- Leonard Peltier, the MOVE 9, the San Francisco 8, the Angola 3, the Puerto Rican independence fighters, “los Cinco”, the anti-imperialists, the Chicano activists, the environmentalists, the animal rights defenders, and the opponents of the terrible School of the Americas, along with so many more. Neither have we heard you make a call for the freedom of more than 10,000 Palestinian political prisoners who endure constant torture in Israel’s extermination camps.
As a matter of fact, when the right wing columnist Michael Smerconish asked you about Mumia Abu-Jamal during your campaign, you said you didn’t know much about his case, but that anyone who kills a cop deserves the death penalty or life in prison. (Philadelphia Inquirer, October 10, 2008). Are we to believe that a defender of human rights like yourself knows little or nothing about the case of one of the most widely supported political prisoners in the world and is not aware of all the violations of his constitutional rights during his trial, which have been duly registered by a long list of human rights organizations, including Amnesty International?
Please don’t tell us that you agree with the political motives of the Fraternal Order of Police and politicians like Pennsylvania Governor Edward G. Rendell, District Attorney Lynn Abraham, and Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille. These public officials who incriminated Mumia Abu-Jamal of homicide are the very people who are still in power and block every attempt to achieve justice and freedom in his case. You couldn’t possible believe that his membership in the Black Panther Party in the ‘60s and his sympathy with the MOVE organization constitute a crime, could you?
President Obama, you have a great opportunity to act on behalf of justice and freedom for Mumia Abu-Jamal and all the political prisoners in your country. What do you intend to do?
Amig@s de Mumia, México
Estimado presidente Obama:
Aprovechamos su visita a México el 16 de abril, para instarle a pronunciarse por la justicia y libertad en el caso del preso político Mumia Abu- Jamal. Es vergonzoso que este aclamado periodista y escritor sigue en el corredor de la muerte 27 años después de su detención el 9 de diciembre de 1981, bajo condiciones inhumanas y denigrantes, y aún más vergonzoso que la corte más alta de la nación, la Suprema Corte de Estados Unidos, acaba de romper su propios precedentes en su afán de negarle un nuevo juicio para comprobar su inocencia en el asesinato del policía Daniel Faulkner.
Somos cientos de miles de personas en el mundo que compartimos la lucha de Mumia Abu-Jamal para un mundo mejor. Apreciamos sus columnas
semanales y los seis libros que él ha escrito desde el corredor de la muerte. Apreciamos su dignidad y congruencia, y queremos verlo libre.
Hasta la fecha, la Suprema Corte no ha respondido a la petición de la fiscalía para reimponer la pena de muerte, rechazada por el juez federal William Yohn en el 2001, quien había dictado que sería necesario celebrar una audiencia para determinar su sentencia en el evento de que la fiscalía quisiera reimponer la pena de muerte. Su dictamen fue avalado por el Tribunal Federal de Apelaciones del Tercer Circuito en mayo del 2008. Pero ahora la fiscalía de Filadelfia pretende ejecutarlo sin audiencia alguna con el respaldo del sindicato de policías y de las autoridades públicas que=2 0piden su cabeza. ¿Qué opina de la amenaza de un linchamiento moderno, presidente Obama?
Presidente Obama, su victoria fue celebrada en todas partes del mundo como un gran avance contra el racismo, pero hasta ahora usted no ha denunciado la situación de que 41% de todos los presos en Estados Unidos y 41.9% de los condenados a la muerte son africano-americanos aunque representan sólo 12.3% de la población total del país. De los presos políticos, más de la mitad son de la población africano-americana. En sus juicios políticos, el racismo fue un gran factor. Éste también fue el caso en el juicio de Mumia Abu-Jamal, en el cual el fiscal Joseph McGill usó 10 de sus 15 vetos perentorios para excluir a los candidatos negros del jurado y el juez Albert Sabo dijo: “Les voy a ayudar a freír el nigger”.
Durante su campaña electoral, usted se pronunció por un fin a los abusos de las libertades civiles y al régimen de tortura. También se pronunció por la libertad de los presos políticos de Burma, inclusive la presa política Aung San Suu Kyi. Pero no escuchamos una sola palabra suya en apoyo a Mumia Abu-Jamal o más de cien otros presos y presas políticos que han pasado décadas de tortura, aislamiento y condiciones denigrantes en las mazmorras de Estados Unidos, condenados por su activismo político. Ahí están Leonard Peltier, “los 9 de MOVE”, “los 8 de San Francisco”, “los 3 de Angola”, los independentistas puertorriqueños, “los 5 cubanos”, los anti-imperialistas, los activistas chicanos, los ecologistas, los defensores de animales, los opositores al terrible Escuela de las Américas, y tantos otros. Tampoco escuchamos un llamado suyo por la libertad de más de 10,000 presos políticos palestinos que aguantan las torturas en los campos de exterminación de Israel.
De hecho, cuando el columnista derechista Michael Smerconish le preguntó sobre Mumia Abu-Jamal durante su campaña, usted dijo que no sabía mucho sobre el caso, pero que “si alguien mata a un policía, él merece la pena de muerte o cadena perpetua” (Philadelphia Inquirer, 10 de octubre, 2008). ¿Debemos creer que un defensor de los derechos humanos no conozca el caso de uno de los presos políticos con mayor apoyo popular en el mundo y que no conozca las múltiples violaciones de derechos constitucionales en su proceso, señaladas por una larga lista de grupos de derechos humanos, inclusive Amnistía Internacional?
¿Usted está de acuerdo con los motivos políticos de la Organización Fraternal de Policía y de oficiales como el gobernador de Pennsylvania, Edward G. Rendell, la fiscal Lynn Abraham, y el juez principal de la Suprema Corte del estado de Pennsylvania, Ronald D. Castille para incriminar a Mumia Abu-Jamal del homicidio? Ellos son los que siguen en poder y obstaculizan cualquier esfuerzo para lograr justicia y libertad en su caso. O ¿a caso cree usted que su militancia en los Panteras Negras en los años ’60 y su simpatía con la organización MOVE constituyen un crimen?
Presidente Obama, usted tiene la gran oportunidad de promover justicia y libertad para Mumia Abu-Jamal y todos los presos políticos de su país. ¿Qué piensa hacer al respecto?
Amig@s de Mumia, México
Friday, April 24, 2009
Birthday Greeting to Mumia Abu-Jamal
It is an honor to honor you on your birthday. You who give so much, you who receive so little, deserve all the love and respect that we are capable of. The amount and the quality of the work you have produced would be an amazing feat for any human being. But since most of your work has been completed on the bleeding corridors of death row, your accomplishments are almost super-human. Through your books, articles and speeches, you have taught us many lessons, exposed many untruths and constantly reminded us of the glaring contradictions of this world we live in. You have taught us about the horrors of U.S. imperialism in its many deadly forms and you have consistently denounced war and military intervention. You have taught us about the brutal racism and systematic injustices embedded in the U.S. justice system, and the conveyor belt exploitation of the prison-industrial complex. You have educated us about political repression in the United States and about the railroading of political prisoners. You have written about the profit motivated, undemocratic nature of U.S. democracy. You have written about the inhumane priorities of this government, hell-bent on spending trillions of dollars on the war machine, cutting taxes for the rich and cutting public funds for education, health-care and public services. You have written about modern forms of racism and exploitation and encouraged us to build a broad-based movement for social justice.
But now, more than any other time in history, we anxiously await your words, treasure your articles, because in this 21st century, truth has become almost extinct. We are trapped in an Orwellian nightmare of doublespeak, manicured lies and deliberate distortions. An international system of state terrorism has been put into place in the name of fighting terrorism. Any dastardly deed or vicious act can be justified, in the name of fighting terrorism. We are asked to look the other way in the face of torture, arbitrary imprisonment, and massive bombings of civilians. We are asked to look the other way in the face of shameless violations of human rights and international law. The Homeland Security Act and other repressive laws have eliminated most of the so-called constitutional guarantees that once existed inside the United States. Brazen lies are used to justify war, military occupation and genocide.
Your voice has always been strong and unwavering, and you have indeed been the "voice of the voiceless." But at this moment in history, the name Mumia Abu-Jamal means so much more to me and so many others. i was not alive during the rise of fascism in the 1930s, but i am sure for many people, Hitler and Mussolini must have seemed invincible. Today's fascists are even more dangerous and they are present at the highest levels of the U.S. Government. They have virtually unlimited funds, highly sophisticated technology, and control an awesome propaganda machine. They manufacture and export a bellicose made-in-Hollywood culture, where violence is the rule, not the exception. In this turbulent political climate many people feel confused, powerless and overwhelmed. The imperialist powers that rule this planet are vicious, evil, and powerful, but they can, and they will be defeated.
For so many of us today, Mumia, you represent not only truth, not only resistance, you represent the purest form of hope. As hard and as painful as life must be for you at times, you refuse to give up, and you refuse to be defeated. In the midst of so much ugliness and violence, you insist on being kind, on being humane, on being loving, on being a beautiful human being. Let us follow your example, and for the sake of our children, and our grandchildren, and the future of this planet, let us refuse to be discouraged, let us refuse to be disheartened.
On this day let us celebrate our hope for the future. Let us celebrate our hope for peace and our hope for social justice. Let us celebrate our desire to end all forms of terrorism - including the terrorism of hunger, the terrorism of underdevelopment, and the terrorism of exploitation. On this day let us celebrate our commitment to freedom. Let us celebrate our commitment to freeing you, to freeing all Political prisoners and to freeing this world. Let us have faith in our power, in our creativity and in our ability to make freedom real.
Free all Political Prisoners,
I send you Love and Revolutionary Greetings
From Cuba, One of the Largest, Most Resistant and Most Courageous Palenques (Maroon Camps) That has ever existed on the Face of this Planet.
Assata Shakur
April 24, 2004
http://www.assatashakur.net
But now, more than any other time in history, we anxiously await your words, treasure your articles, because in this 21st century, truth has become almost extinct. We are trapped in an Orwellian nightmare of doublespeak, manicured lies and deliberate distortions. An international system of state terrorism has been put into place in the name of fighting terrorism. Any dastardly deed or vicious act can be justified, in the name of fighting terrorism. We are asked to look the other way in the face of torture, arbitrary imprisonment, and massive bombings of civilians. We are asked to look the other way in the face of shameless violations of human rights and international law. The Homeland Security Act and other repressive laws have eliminated most of the so-called constitutional guarantees that once existed inside the United States. Brazen lies are used to justify war, military occupation and genocide.
Your voice has always been strong and unwavering, and you have indeed been the "voice of the voiceless." But at this moment in history, the name Mumia Abu-Jamal means so much more to me and so many others. i was not alive during the rise of fascism in the 1930s, but i am sure for many people, Hitler and Mussolini must have seemed invincible. Today's fascists are even more dangerous and they are present at the highest levels of the U.S. Government. They have virtually unlimited funds, highly sophisticated technology, and control an awesome propaganda machine. They manufacture and export a bellicose made-in-Hollywood culture, where violence is the rule, not the exception. In this turbulent political climate many people feel confused, powerless and overwhelmed. The imperialist powers that rule this planet are vicious, evil, and powerful, but they can, and they will be defeated.
For so many of us today, Mumia, you represent not only truth, not only resistance, you represent the purest form of hope. As hard and as painful as life must be for you at times, you refuse to give up, and you refuse to be defeated. In the midst of so much ugliness and violence, you insist on being kind, on being humane, on being loving, on being a beautiful human being. Let us follow your example, and for the sake of our children, and our grandchildren, and the future of this planet, let us refuse to be discouraged, let us refuse to be disheartened.
On this day let us celebrate our hope for the future. Let us celebrate our hope for peace and our hope for social justice. Let us celebrate our desire to end all forms of terrorism - including the terrorism of hunger, the terrorism of underdevelopment, and the terrorism of exploitation. On this day let us celebrate our commitment to freedom. Let us celebrate our commitment to freeing you, to freeing all Political prisoners and to freeing this world. Let us have faith in our power, in our creativity and in our ability to make freedom real.
Free all Political Prisoners,
I send you Love and Revolutionary Greetings
From Cuba, One of the Largest, Most Resistant and Most Courageous Palenques (Maroon Camps) That has ever existed on the Face of this Planet.
Assata Shakur
April 24, 2004
http://www.assatashakur.net
Monday, April 20, 2009
Democracy Now Interviews Mumia!
Check out the April 16 interview with Mumia on Democracy Now!
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/4/16/without_struggle_there_is_nothing_mumia
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/4/16/without_struggle_there_is_nothing_mumia
Send Letters to Barack Obama for Mumia!
from Sis. Fatirah Aziz:
Peace,
Please, please continue to send letters/emails to President Barack Obama on Mumia's behalf. He is the President of the United States, and even if he doesn't directly pardon Mumia, he certainly has the power to initiate an investigation, or other executive action!
NOTE: This is a sample letter, you can replace Mr. Obama with Eric Holder or further personalize it and send it out!
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
202.456.1414
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Dear President Obama:
I am writing to request that you grant an Executive Pardon, or at the very least, insure that the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal is reviewed by impartial entities. If you or Mrs. Obama investigate this case,you will find innumerable instances of judicial misconduct, evidence tampering and racism. The Governor of Pennsylvania, Edward G. Rendell, the District Attorney Lynn Abraham, and the Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Ronald D. Castille, all had a part in rail-roading Mumia. These are the people who are still in power and who thwart every attempt at justice for Mumia.
Mumia is an innocent man. He is a sought after speaker (via audio tapes) at commencements in prestigious universities and other events. He is the author of weekly columns and several best-selling books. Many in the entertainment and educational field have taken up his cause as they realize the injustice being carried out. It is a disgrace and a shame that this wonderful man has been incarcerated for more than thirty years, based on the agenda of those in power.
Realizing that you have a platform for Change and Fairness, I appeal to you and Mrs. Obama to please see that justice is realized in this case. These are his specifics:
Mumia Abu-Jamal # AM 8335
SCI Greene
175 Progress Drive
Waynesburg, PA 15730
Thank you
Name
Address
Contact info
Peace,
Please, please continue to send letters/emails to President Barack Obama on Mumia's behalf. He is the President of the United States, and even if he doesn't directly pardon Mumia, he certainly has the power to initiate an investigation, or other executive action!
NOTE: This is a sample letter, you can replace Mr. Obama with Eric Holder or further personalize it and send it out!
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
202.456.1414
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Dear President Obama:
I am writing to request that you grant an Executive Pardon, or at the very least, insure that the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal is reviewed by impartial entities. If you or Mrs. Obama investigate this case,you will find innumerable instances of judicial misconduct, evidence tampering and racism. The Governor of Pennsylvania, Edward G. Rendell, the District Attorney Lynn Abraham, and the Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Ronald D. Castille, all had a part in rail-roading Mumia. These are the people who are still in power and who thwart every attempt at justice for Mumia.
Mumia is an innocent man. He is a sought after speaker (via audio tapes) at commencements in prestigious universities and other events. He is the author of weekly columns and several best-selling books. Many in the entertainment and educational field have taken up his cause as they realize the injustice being carried out. It is a disgrace and a shame that this wonderful man has been incarcerated for more than thirty years, based on the agenda of those in power.
Realizing that you have a platform for Change and Fairness, I appeal to you and Mrs. Obama to please see that justice is realized in this case. These are his specifics:
Mumia Abu-Jamal # AM 8335
SCI Greene
175 Progress Drive
Waynesburg, PA 15730
Thank you
Name
Address
Contact info
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)