By David A. Love
Published by The Black Commentator
October 18, 2007 - Cover Story
A group of journalists is determined to seek a fair retrial of death row prisoner, noted journalist and former Black Panther Mumia Abu-Jamal, and they point to evidence they say provides further proof of his innocence: photos from the crime scene that the jury never had the chance to see.The group, Journalists for Mumia, was founded by Hans Bennett, a Philadelphia journalist, and Dr. Michael Schiffmann, German linguist at the University of Heidelberg, to challenge what they characterize as "the long history of media bias against Abu-Jamal's case for a new trial." Abu-Jamal, formerly known as Wesley Cook, was arrested and convicted of the 1981 murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. He has been on Pennsylvania's death row since then, although a federal judge affirmed his conviction but vacated his death sentence in 2001. A three-judge, federal appeals court panel is reconsidering the case for his retrial, and heard oral arguments on May 17, 2007.
Faulkner was killed on the corner of Locust and 13th Streets in Philadelphia, on the morning of December 9, 1981. Abu-Jamal and his brother, Billy Cook, were found lying on the sidewalk when police arrived at the scene to find Faulkner dead. In addition, Abu-Jamal, who also had been shot, was beaten by police when they came to the scene. And he was arraigned at his hospital bed while recovering from life-threatening injuries.This case has been one of the most contentious, most widely observed and most thoroughly critiqued cases of our times, as it has put a spotlight on the contagion of police brutality, racism and corruption in the criminal justice system, and the capricious application of the death penalty. Amnesty International has called for a new trial for Abu-Jamal. "It's shocking that the US justice system has repeatedly failed to address the appalling violation of Mumia Abu-Jamal's fundamental fair trial rights," said Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen.
Through prodigious research, Schiffmann has located a number of photos taken by press photographer Pedro Polakoff. Polakoff, who arrived on the scene 12 minutes after Faulkner's killing, produced at least 26 photos before the arrival of the Philadelphia Police Department's Mobile Crime Unit. Some of the photos are highlighted in Schiffmann's new book, Race Against Death. Mumia Abu-Jamal: A Black Revolutionary in White America. The book — an expansion of Schiffmann's doctoral dissertation — was recently released in Germany, and has yet to be published in the United States.
Polakoff told Schiffmann that the crime scene was poorly managed and unsecured, "the most messed up crime scene I have ever seen." Polakoff attempted to hand his photos to the D.A.'s office on two occasions — before the trial in 1982 and in 1995 during Mumia's post-conviction relief hearing — but to no avail. Apparently, they weren't interested in what he had to show them. (And Schiffmann and Bennett say that Polakoff, who until very recently assumed Mumia was guilty, and that Mumia was the passenger in his brother's car, had no interest in contacting Mumia's lawyers regarding the photos.)
Perhaps this was because his photos presented some damning truths. In his book, Schiffmann makes a number of important arguments:
The police manipulated the evidence that was provided to the trial court. For example, Polakoff's photo shows Faulkner's cap resting on the roof of Billy Cook's Volkswagen. Yet, in a police photo taken 10 minutes later, the cap is on the sidewalk in front of 1234 Locust.
Police officer, James Forbes, testified at trial that he had secured Faulkner's and Abu-Jamal's weapons, and did not touch the metal parts in order to preserve the fingerprints. Yet, Polakoff's photos show that Forbes had touched the metal parts of the weapons, destroying valuable evidence in the process.
• Polakoff told Schiffmann that officers at the crime scene said they believed the shooter was sitting in the passenger seat of Billy Cook's Volkswagen, supporting the argument that a third person was at the crime scene.
• One of the prosecution's key witnesses, a cab driver names Robert Chobert, claimed he was sitting in his cab behind Faulkner's police car during the shooting. Yet, there is no taxicab in Polakoff's crime scene photos.
• The prosecution asserted that Mumia killed Faulkner by standing over the already wounded officer and unloading several shots from a .38 revolver.However, the Polakoff photos show a clean trickle of blood on the pavement, not the splatter of blood or cement damage that one would expect from the firing of such a weapon.
Journalists for Mumia are providing a valuable public service in the honored tradition of the First Amendment. Linn Washington, Jr., veteran journalist who worked for the Philadelphia Tribune at the time of Mumia's arrest, was on the case at a time when most of the Philadelphia press corps were asleep on the issues of race and criminal justice. Washington recently reflected on the role of the press in the U.S. Constitution: "One of the reasons why we have this First Amendment is [the framers] said, they knew that power corrupts absolutely. So they had this check and balance, you know, where the executive had a check on the legislative, and the legislative and a check on the courts, and the courts had a check on both of them. But who is going to check the checkers? Well that was supposed to be the press. So, the press had a watchdog role to look at what government is doing, and more specifically, look at what the government is doing wrong to who? We the people."
And the Philadelphia of 1981, on the heels of the brutal reign of police-chief-turned-mayor Frank Rizzo, was a time of rampant official corruption and misconduct, racism, and police brutality. Washington noted that during the year of Mumia's arrest, five men were framed by the Philadelphia police for murder and exonerated years later. Two of the innocent men spent as much as 20 years in prison before their release, and one man spent 1,375 days on death row before he became a free man. This legacy of police corruption haunts the city to this day, at a time when better police-community relations are needed to stem a
tide of gun homicides.
There is much in Mumia's case that is troubling, and points to a dysfunctional system in dire need of repair.
• The prosecutor had a history of excluding African American jurors, and struck 10 of 14 Black potential jurors, but only 5 of 25 whites.
• In a sworn statement, a court stenographer said she overheard the trial judge, Albert Sabo, saying he would help the prosecution "fry the nigger."
• For twelve years, prosecutors withheld evidence that the driver's license of a third man was found in Faulkner's pocket at the crime scene.
• Defense witnesses who testified that someone other than Abu-Jamal killed Faulkner were intimidated.
• Five of the seven members of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which denied his appeal, received campaign contributions from the Fraternal Order of Police, the primary group that has advocated for the execution of Mumia, who they regard as an unrepentant cop killer.
All of this is about Mumia, yet far more than just Mumia, for Mumia's case marks a part of the continuum that represents the tortured, tragically consistent narrative of people of color in America's justice system. Decades before Abu-Jamal, there were the Scottsboro boys. In 1931, nine black teenagers in Scottsboro, Alabama — ranging in age from thirteen to nineteen — were accused of raping two white women. Tried without adequate representation, they were sentenced to death by all-white juries, despite a lack of evidence. And one of the women later recanted.
In more recent years, there were the Central Park Five, the five Black and Latino men convicted of raping and beating a female jogger in Central Park, N.Y., in 1989, and later found to be railroaded. Donald
Trump had spent $85,000 on full-page newspaper ads calling for the death penalty for the five youths, who were characterized as a wolf pack. And of course, today we have the Jena Six, arrested and prosecuted in a Louisiana town for fighting against nooses dangling under their high school's "White tree," while the White students who planted the nooses and committed other acts of violence were given a pass.
We will never know how many innocent people in this country — those who could not afford to buy justice — were sent to their deaths or forced to languish in prison for the rest of their lives, all on a lack of
evidence or doctored and cooked-up evidence, served up by police officers who wanted to make a name for themselves, and prosecutors who aspired to higher office on a tough-on-crime stance.
Society cannot help those who were victimized by kangaroo justice, but no longer live among us and are now but a fleeting memory. But we can still help Mumia Abu-Jamal, and in doing so we begin to repair this
system of "justice" and save ourselves in the process.
Copyright © 2007 by David A. Love
The new crime scene photos can be viewed at the Journalists for Mumia
website: www.abu-jamal-news.com
http://www.blackcommentator.com/249/249_cover_color_of_law_photos_mumia.html
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Mumia Abu-Jamal: crucial decision on the way
from Freedom Socialist • Vol. 28, No. 5 • October-November 2007
Wall mural in Lisbon, Portugal, demands freedom for Abu-Jamal.
Photo: Anne-Marie Algemo
Supporters of imprisoned African American journalist Mumia Abu-Jamal, a former member of the Black Panther Party, continue to wait hopefully for an imminent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Abu-Jamal has spent 25 years on death row after being framed for the killing of a Philadelphia policeman in 1981. His case has won international attention for its revelations of racism, fraud and bias in the legal system. It has brought to the foreground the right to a fair trial, the inhumanity of the death penalty, and the system’s particular vindictiveness toward Black radicals.
After numerous thwarted attempts to appeal his verdict and sentencing and to bring new evidence before the courts, a three-judge appeals court panel heard arguments on the case in May 2007. As we go to press, a decision is expected at any moment.
Fateful decision. As described by Abu-Jamal’s attorney Robert Bryan, the possible rulings by the panel are these:
• An entirely new jury trial on the question of Abu-Jamal’s guilt;
• A new jury trial to consider the issue of life imprisonment or the death penalty;
• A return to the lower U.S. District Court for further proceedings; or
• Denial of all relief.
Whichever side loses can be expected to seek a rehearing and to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for an appeal. But, as neither of these legal recourses is likely if the panel rules against Mumia, a great deal rides on its decision.
Days of action. If the panel does rule negatively, Mumia’s hope for keeping avenues of appeal open lies with strong public protest. The International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia and other support organizations are calling for immediate protests in the streets if the panel’s ruling is unfavorable. “Day after” activities are planned in several cities. Among them:
In Philadelphia, there will be a march from the scene of the 1981 confrontation at 13th and Locust to the Federal Building. In San Francisco, the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal has announced a demonstration at the Federal Building.
Two separate rallies are planned in New York City. The Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition and the Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal will congregate at the Adam Clayton Powell Jr. State Office Building from 5:00-8:00 p.m. (1-4 p.m. if the day after is a Saturday). The Partisan Defense Committee has called for a rally at the Federal Building in Lower Manhattan from 5:00-7:00 p.m. (1-4 p.m. if a Saturday).
In Seattle, the Freedom Socialist Party and Radical Women are calling on people to attend a next-day demo at 4:00 p.m. at the downtown Federal Courthouse. In Portland, Oregon, RW and FSP are organizing a gathering from 4:00-6:00 p.m. at Terry Schrunk Plaza across from the Federal Building. Come prepared to speak at an open microphone if you have something to say, and bring picket signs and banners!
And a national demonstration in Philadelphia is being called for the third Saturday after the decision.
A voice that will not be silenced. While all wait on tenterhooks, Mumia himself continues his masterful and galvanizing commentaries on political happenings in the U.S. and the world. His deeply insightful commentaries on issues such as U.S. atrocities in Iraq, defense of the Cuban Five, racism in sports, and the commutation of Kenneth Foster’s death sentence (see story on page at left), can be read at www.prisonradio. org. Mumia refuses to censor himself or tailor his message to accommodate notions of “respectable” dissent. Instead he courageously seeks to educate the public about the radical realities of class and race in the U.S.A.
For instance, in his commentary “The Politics of Promises” (Aug. 15, 2007), he says, “For millions of people, the hunger for an end to the Bush regime is gnawing at their innards.
“But are they hungry for a Democratic warmonger, in the place of a Republican one?
“Is that change — or the same old madness, in another wrapper?”
Meanwhile, a new documentary on Abu-Jamal, In Prison My Whole Life, will screen simultaneously at London and Rome film festivals in October. This powerful film is sure to rally thousands more to Mumia’s defense.
The world needs this man alive, free, and mobilizing for justice.
Watch for the latest case updates at the websites of New York City and San Francisco coalitions www.freemumia.com and www.freemumia.org.
Write to Mumia at Mumia Abu-Jamal, AM 8335, SCI Greene, 175 Progress Dr., Waynesburg, PA 15370.
Wall mural in Lisbon, Portugal, demands freedom for Abu-Jamal.
Photo: Anne-Marie Algemo
Supporters of imprisoned African American journalist Mumia Abu-Jamal, a former member of the Black Panther Party, continue to wait hopefully for an imminent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Abu-Jamal has spent 25 years on death row after being framed for the killing of a Philadelphia policeman in 1981. His case has won international attention for its revelations of racism, fraud and bias in the legal system. It has brought to the foreground the right to a fair trial, the inhumanity of the death penalty, and the system’s particular vindictiveness toward Black radicals.
After numerous thwarted attempts to appeal his verdict and sentencing and to bring new evidence before the courts, a three-judge appeals court panel heard arguments on the case in May 2007. As we go to press, a decision is expected at any moment.
Fateful decision. As described by Abu-Jamal’s attorney Robert Bryan, the possible rulings by the panel are these:
• An entirely new jury trial on the question of Abu-Jamal’s guilt;
• A new jury trial to consider the issue of life imprisonment or the death penalty;
• A return to the lower U.S. District Court for further proceedings; or
• Denial of all relief.
Whichever side loses can be expected to seek a rehearing and to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for an appeal. But, as neither of these legal recourses is likely if the panel rules against Mumia, a great deal rides on its decision.
Days of action. If the panel does rule negatively, Mumia’s hope for keeping avenues of appeal open lies with strong public protest. The International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia and other support organizations are calling for immediate protests in the streets if the panel’s ruling is unfavorable. “Day after” activities are planned in several cities. Among them:
In Philadelphia, there will be a march from the scene of the 1981 confrontation at 13th and Locust to the Federal Building. In San Francisco, the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal has announced a demonstration at the Federal Building.
Two separate rallies are planned in New York City. The Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition and the Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal will congregate at the Adam Clayton Powell Jr. State Office Building from 5:00-8:00 p.m. (1-4 p.m. if the day after is a Saturday). The Partisan Defense Committee has called for a rally at the Federal Building in Lower Manhattan from 5:00-7:00 p.m. (1-4 p.m. if a Saturday).
In Seattle, the Freedom Socialist Party and Radical Women are calling on people to attend a next-day demo at 4:00 p.m. at the downtown Federal Courthouse. In Portland, Oregon, RW and FSP are organizing a gathering from 4:00-6:00 p.m. at Terry Schrunk Plaza across from the Federal Building. Come prepared to speak at an open microphone if you have something to say, and bring picket signs and banners!
And a national demonstration in Philadelphia is being called for the third Saturday after the decision.
A voice that will not be silenced. While all wait on tenterhooks, Mumia himself continues his masterful and galvanizing commentaries on political happenings in the U.S. and the world. His deeply insightful commentaries on issues such as U.S. atrocities in Iraq, defense of the Cuban Five, racism in sports, and the commutation of Kenneth Foster’s death sentence (see story on page at left), can be read at www.prisonradio. org. Mumia refuses to censor himself or tailor his message to accommodate notions of “respectable” dissent. Instead he courageously seeks to educate the public about the radical realities of class and race in the U.S.A.
For instance, in his commentary “The Politics of Promises” (Aug. 15, 2007), he says, “For millions of people, the hunger for an end to the Bush regime is gnawing at their innards.
“But are they hungry for a Democratic warmonger, in the place of a Republican one?
“Is that change — or the same old madness, in another wrapper?”
Meanwhile, a new documentary on Abu-Jamal, In Prison My Whole Life, will screen simultaneously at London and Rome film festivals in October. This powerful film is sure to rally thousands more to Mumia’s defense.
The world needs this man alive, free, and mobilizing for justice.
Watch for the latest case updates at the websites of New York City and San Francisco coalitions www.freemumia.com and www.freemumia.org.
Write to Mumia at Mumia Abu-Jamal, AM 8335, SCI Greene, 175 Progress Dr., Waynesburg, PA 15370.
Monday, October 15, 2007
A CALL TO JOIN "DAY AFTER" PLANS IN THE CURRENT STRUGGLE FOR MUMIA'S LIFE AND FREEDOM
A CALL TO JOIN "DAY AFTER" PLANS IN THE CURRENT STRUGGLE FOR MUMIA'S LIFE AND FREEDOM
NEW YORK ACTIONS
THE DAY AFTER A DECISION IS REACHED gather at the:
Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. State Office Building
125th Street
5 to 8 PM, if it is on a weekday, and from 1 to 4 PM if it is a Saturday.
PHILADELPHIA ACTIONS
THE DAY AFTER A DECISION IS REACHED there will be a march:
13th and Locust to the Federal Building
(for more information: ICFFMAJ@aol.com)
The Partisan Defense Committee has called for a "day after"demonstration at the Federal Building in Lower Manhattan at 5 PM if the decision is reached on a weekday and from 1 to 4 PM if on a Saturday. In San Francisco, the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal has called for a demonstration on the "day after" at 5 PM at the Federal Court House, 7th and Mission Street (NOT the Federal Building.) For a flyer for other west coast actions, please CLICK HERE.
Please circulate widely
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SIGN THE FOLLOWING CALL, EMAIL info@freemumia.com ASAP!
We join the celebration of the people's victory in Texas supported by an international movement to save Kenneth Foster/Haramia KiNassor's life. May the movement continue until it frees Haramia altogether and abolishes the death penalty and the prison industrial complex. And congratulations to the tens of thousands of especially young Black people, who poured into the streets of Jena and around the country to stand up against injustice and racism, and the criminalization, brutalization, and railroading of young men of color into prison.
On the heels of these important challenges to the racist death machine in Texas, and to the intense racism and injustice we see across this country, perpetrated and supported by all aspects of the government, we await the Third Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Mumia. As the decision could come down any day, we are making a tentative plan for the "DAY AFTER" should the decision be a negative one. In other words, if Mumia's death sentence is either affirmed or life in prison is imposed, we immediately take to the streets. Mumia should be released, based on his innocence and his so-called "trial". But we demand, at the very least, that he be granted a new and fair trial.
In an inter-city consultation, we have decided on three steps in our response:
1. An immediate press conference in Philadelphia upon announcement of the decision (that day, if possible, or at the latest the following morning),
2. LOCAL ACTIONS AROUND THE COUNTRY THE "DAY AFTER" and,
3. NATIONAL DEMONSTRATION on the third Saturday after the decision, in Philadelphia.
Some of the planned local activities for the "day after" are: in Philadelphia there will be a march from 13th and Locust, the scene of the original confrontation on December 9, 1981, to the Federal Building. It will be the following evening if that turns out to be a week day, or the following Saturday at noon. In New York City, the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition and the Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal are calling for people to gather at the Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. State Office Building on 125th Street from 5 to 8 PM, if it is on a weekday, and from 1 to 4 PM if it is a Saturday. We will let the community know what happened, mobilize for greater support for the street naming campaign, and organize people to join us in Philadelphia for the national demonstration scheduled for three weeks later. The Partisan Defense Committee has called for a "day after"demonstration at the Federal Building in Lower Manhattan at 5 PM if on a weekday and from 1 to 4 PM if on a Saturday. In San Francisco, the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal has called for a demonstration on the "day after" at 5 PM at the Federal Court House, 7th and Mission Street (NOT the Federal Building.). Call your local committee to find out what is being planned, or organize an activity. But everyone's voice of protest should be heard in some way if the decision is a bad one. We must free our Brother now!
As soon as we know what other local committees are planning for the "day after", we will send that information out. Please call the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition Hotline in NYC (212) 330-8029 to leave a message as to your plan for a local response with both your phone number and your e-mail address. You can also call Pam Africa at (215) 476-8812 or Suzanne Ross (917) 584-2135 if you want to speak with someone in person.
Free Mumia and All Political Prisoners! Abolish the Death Penalty and the Prison Industrial Complex! Stop Police and Government Terrorism!
(list in formation)
Pam Africa, International Concerned Family & Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal (ICFFMAJ)
The MOVE Organization
Amiri and Amina Baraka, Poets/Activists
Albany Political Prisoners Support Committee
Ashanti Alston, National Jericho Movement
Elombe Brath, Patrice Lumumba Coalition/ Harlem Campaign to Name a
Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Comite de Soutien a Mumia Abu-Jamal de Marseille (France)
Comite Mumia de Saint-Denis (France)
Dhoruba Bin Wahad, National Jericho Movement
Tameka Cage, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Martha Conley, Pittsburgh Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Committee
Colia Clark, Grandmother, Mothers, Daughters, Sisters and Granddaughters
on the Move to Free Mumia and More; Richard Wright Centennial,
International Liason Committee; Socialist Party, Pennsylvania;
Solidarity Committee, Capital District New York
Gwen Debrow, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Herman and Iyaluua Ferguson
Johanna Fernandez, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Frances Goldin, Mumia's literary agent
Lawrence Hamm, People's Organization for Progress (New Jersey)
Chairman Fred Hampton, Prisoners of Conscience Committee (P.O.C.C.)
Noelle Hanrahan, Prison Radio
Immortal Technique
Leslie Jones, International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu
Jamal, (Ithaca, NY)
Phoebe Jones, Global Women's Strike/ Philadelphia, on behalf of
international network
JR, Prisoners of Conscience Committee/POCC, Block Report Radio
Jeff Mackler, Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal (California)
Esperanza Martell, Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia
Abu-Jamal/Iglesia San Romero de las Americas
Monica Moorehead, Millions for Mumia of International Action Center
Suzanne Ross, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Sundiata Sadiq, Ossining NAACP In Exile, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal
Coalition (NYC)
Comite Mumia de Saint-Denis, France
Johnnie Stevens, Ad Hoc Committee to stop police terror
Taina Asili, Activist/Poet
Mark Taylor, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Kazi Toure, The National Jericho Movement
Harold C. Wilson, 122nd Exonerated Death Row Prisoner (Philadelphia)
Kema C. Washington, Father Paul Washington Committee (Philadelphia)
Julia Wright, International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal (Paris, France)
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SIGN THIS CALL, EMAIL info@freemumia.com ASAP!
Guinness World Records Mislabels Move Organization Murders as Mass Suicide
ONA MOVE Everybody!
Ramona of the MOVE organization needs your help. The 2008 Guinness Book Of World Records lists MOVE under "Mass Suicides" based on the May 1985 bombing and MURDER of MOVE people. They also list the MOVE organization with "cults" and lists the source of this misinformation as "The Cult Information Centre". MOVE is not and has never been a cult. MOVE is an organization and certainly did not commit "mass suicide". This is a malevolent and very dangerous lie. It's a deliberate tactic of this system to defame and misrepresent this organization so that when officials wrong us, treat us unjustly and even murder us, a lot of people will accept and dismiss it because of how we have been characterized by this system. We have discovered that both The Guinness Book Of World Records and The Cult Information Centre are based in London. There are several offices based in New York, and we are asking for your help by simply signing your name to demand the removal of the MOVE being labeled a cult and committing mass suicide.
We don't intend to let MOVE be defamed like this because it's wrong and dangerous.
Take care and stay strong
--Ramona
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/OnaMove
Ramona of the MOVE organization needs your help. The 2008 Guinness Book Of World Records lists MOVE under "Mass Suicides" based on the May 1985 bombing and MURDER of MOVE people. They also list the MOVE organization with "cults" and lists the source of this misinformation as "The Cult Information Centre". MOVE is not and has never been a cult. MOVE is an organization and certainly did not commit "mass suicide". This is a malevolent and very dangerous lie. It's a deliberate tactic of this system to defame and misrepresent this organization so that when officials wrong us, treat us unjustly and even murder us, a lot of people will accept and dismiss it because of how we have been characterized by this system. We have discovered that both The Guinness Book Of World Records and The Cult Information Centre are based in London. There are several offices based in New York, and we are asking for your help by simply signing your name to demand the removal of the MOVE being labeled a cult and committing mass suicide.
We don't intend to let MOVE be defamed like this because it's wrong and dangerous.
Take care and stay strong
--Ramona
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/OnaMove
Monday, September 24, 2007
A Call to Join "Day After" Plans in the Current Struggle for Mumia's Life and Freedom
International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu Jamal
September 22, 2007
We join the celebration of the people's victory in Texas supported by an international movement to save Kenneth Foster/Haramia KiNassor's life. May the movement continue until it frees Haramia altogether and abolishes the death penalty and the prison industrial complex. And congratulations to the tens of thousands of especially young Black people, who poured into the streets of Jena and around the country to stand up against injustice and racism, and the criminalization, brutalization, and railroading of young men of color into prison.
On the heels of these important challenges to the racist death machine in Texas, and to the intense racism and injustice we see across this country, perpetrated and supported by all aspects of the government, we await the Third Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Mumia. As the decision could come down any day, we are making a tentative plan for the "DAY AFTER" should the decision be a negative one. In other words, if Mumia's death sentence is either affirmed or life in prison is imposed, we immediately take to the streets. Mumia should be released, based on his innocence and his so-called "trial". But we demand, at the very least, that he be granted a new and fair trial.
In an inter-city consultation, we have decided on three steps in our response:
1. An immediate press conference in Philadelphia upon announcement of the decision (that day, if possible, or at the latest the following morning),
2. Local Actions around the country "The Day After" and,
3. National Demonstration on the third Saturday after the decision, in Philadelphia.
Some of the planned local activities for the "day after" are:
In Philadelphia there will be a march from 13th and Locust, the scene of the original confrontation on December 9, 1981, to the Federal Building. It will be the following evening if that turns out to be a week day, or the following Saturday at noon.
In New York City, the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition and the Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal are calling for people to gather at the Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. State Office Building on 125th Street from 5 to 8 PM, if it is on a weekday, and from 1 to 4 PM if it is a Saturday. We will let the community know what happened, mobilize for greater support for the street naming campaign, and organize people to join us in Philadelphia for the national demonstration scheduled for three weeks later.
The Partisan Defense Committee has called for a "day after"demonstration at the Federal Building in Lower Manhattan at 5 PM if on a weekday and from 1 to 4 PM if on a Saturday.
In San Francisco, the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal has called for a demonstration on the "day after" at 5 PM at the Federal Court House, 7th and Mission Street (NOT the Federal Building.). Call your local committee to find out what is being planned, or organize an activity. But everyone's voice of protest should be heard in some way if the decision is a bad one. We must free our Brother now!
As soon as we know what other local committees are planning for the "day after", we will send that information out. Please call the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition Hotline in NYC (212) 330-8029 to leave a message as to your plan for a local response with both your phone number and your e-mail address. You can also call Pam Africa at (215) 476-8812 or Suzanne Ross (917) 584-2135 if you want to speak with someone in person.
Free Mumia and All Political Prisoners! Abolish the Death Penalty and the Prison Industrial Complex! Stop Police and Government Terrorism!
(list in formation)
Pam Africa, International Concerned Family & Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal (ICFFMAJ)
The MOVE Organization
Amiri and Amina Baraka, Poets/Activists
Albany Political Prisoners Support Committee
Ashanti Alston, National Jericho Movement
Elombe Brath, Patrice Lumumba Coalition/ Harlem Campaign to Name a
Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Comite de Soutien a Mumia Abu-Jamal de Marseille (France)
Comite Mumia de Saint-Denis (France)
Dhoruba Bin Wahad, National Jericho Movement
Tameka Cage, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Martha Conley, Pittsburgh Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Committee
Colia Clark, Grandmother, Mothers, Daughters, Sisters and Granddaughters on the Move to Free Mumia and More; Richard Wright Centennial, International Liason Committee; Socialist Party, Pennsylvania; Solidarity Committee, Capital District New York
Gwen Debrow, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Johanna Fernandez, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Frances Goldin, Mumia's literary agent
Lawrence Hamm, People's Organization for Progress (New Jersey)
Chairman Fred Hampton, Prisoners of Conscience Committee (P.O.C.C.)
Noelle Hanrahan, Prison Radio
Leslie Jones, International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu Jamal, (Ithaca, NY)
Phoebe Jones, Global Women's Strike/ Philadelphia, on behalf of international network
JR, Prisoners of Conscience Committee/POCC, Block Report Radio
Jeff Mackler, Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal (California)
Esperanza Martell, Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal/Iglesia San Romero de las Americas
Monica Moorehead, Millions for Mumia of International Action Center
Suzanne Ross, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Sundiata Sadiq, Ossining NAACP In Exile, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Comite Mumia de Saint-Denis, France
Johnnie Stevens, Ad Hoc Committee to stop police terror
Taina Asili, Activist/Poet
Mark Taylor, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Kazi Toure, The National Jericho Movement
Harold C. Wilson, 122nd Exonerated Death Row Prisoner (Philadelphia)
Kema C. Washington, Father Paul Washington Committee (Philadelphia)
Julia Wright, International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal (Paris, France)
September 22, 2007
We join the celebration of the people's victory in Texas supported by an international movement to save Kenneth Foster/Haramia KiNassor's life. May the movement continue until it frees Haramia altogether and abolishes the death penalty and the prison industrial complex. And congratulations to the tens of thousands of especially young Black people, who poured into the streets of Jena and around the country to stand up against injustice and racism, and the criminalization, brutalization, and railroading of young men of color into prison.
On the heels of these important challenges to the racist death machine in Texas, and to the intense racism and injustice we see across this country, perpetrated and supported by all aspects of the government, we await the Third Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Mumia. As the decision could come down any day, we are making a tentative plan for the "DAY AFTER" should the decision be a negative one. In other words, if Mumia's death sentence is either affirmed or life in prison is imposed, we immediately take to the streets. Mumia should be released, based on his innocence and his so-called "trial". But we demand, at the very least, that he be granted a new and fair trial.
In an inter-city consultation, we have decided on three steps in our response:
1. An immediate press conference in Philadelphia upon announcement of the decision (that day, if possible, or at the latest the following morning),
2. Local Actions around the country "The Day After" and,
3. National Demonstration on the third Saturday after the decision, in Philadelphia.
Some of the planned local activities for the "day after" are:
In Philadelphia there will be a march from 13th and Locust, the scene of the original confrontation on December 9, 1981, to the Federal Building. It will be the following evening if that turns out to be a week day, or the following Saturday at noon.
In New York City, the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition and the Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal are calling for people to gather at the Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. State Office Building on 125th Street from 5 to 8 PM, if it is on a weekday, and from 1 to 4 PM if it is a Saturday. We will let the community know what happened, mobilize for greater support for the street naming campaign, and organize people to join us in Philadelphia for the national demonstration scheduled for three weeks later.
The Partisan Defense Committee has called for a "day after"demonstration at the Federal Building in Lower Manhattan at 5 PM if on a weekday and from 1 to 4 PM if on a Saturday.
In San Francisco, the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal has called for a demonstration on the "day after" at 5 PM at the Federal Court House, 7th and Mission Street (NOT the Federal Building.). Call your local committee to find out what is being planned, or organize an activity. But everyone's voice of protest should be heard in some way if the decision is a bad one. We must free our Brother now!
As soon as we know what other local committees are planning for the "day after", we will send that information out. Please call the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition Hotline in NYC (212) 330-8029 to leave a message as to your plan for a local response with both your phone number and your e-mail address. You can also call Pam Africa at (215) 476-8812 or Suzanne Ross (917) 584-2135 if you want to speak with someone in person.
Free Mumia and All Political Prisoners! Abolish the Death Penalty and the Prison Industrial Complex! Stop Police and Government Terrorism!
(list in formation)
Pam Africa, International Concerned Family & Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal (ICFFMAJ)
The MOVE Organization
Amiri and Amina Baraka, Poets/Activists
Albany Political Prisoners Support Committee
Ashanti Alston, National Jericho Movement
Elombe Brath, Patrice Lumumba Coalition/ Harlem Campaign to Name a
Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Comite de Soutien a Mumia Abu-Jamal de Marseille (France)
Comite Mumia de Saint-Denis (France)
Dhoruba Bin Wahad, National Jericho Movement
Tameka Cage, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Martha Conley, Pittsburgh Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Committee
Colia Clark, Grandmother, Mothers, Daughters, Sisters and Granddaughters on the Move to Free Mumia and More; Richard Wright Centennial, International Liason Committee; Socialist Party, Pennsylvania; Solidarity Committee, Capital District New York
Gwen Debrow, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Johanna Fernandez, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Frances Goldin, Mumia's literary agent
Lawrence Hamm, People's Organization for Progress (New Jersey)
Chairman Fred Hampton, Prisoners of Conscience Committee (P.O.C.C.)
Noelle Hanrahan, Prison Radio
Leslie Jones, International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu Jamal, (Ithaca, NY)
Phoebe Jones, Global Women's Strike/ Philadelphia, on behalf of international network
JR, Prisoners of Conscience Committee/POCC, Block Report Radio
Jeff Mackler, Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal (California)
Esperanza Martell, Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal/Iglesia San Romero de las Americas
Monica Moorehead, Millions for Mumia of International Action Center
Suzanne Ross, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Sundiata Sadiq, Ossining NAACP In Exile, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Comite Mumia de Saint-Denis, France
Johnnie Stevens, Ad Hoc Committee to stop police terror
Taina Asili, Activist/Poet
Mark Taylor, Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Kazi Toure, The National Jericho Movement
Harold C. Wilson, 122nd Exonerated Death Row Prisoner (Philadelphia)
Kema C. Washington, Father Paul Washington Committee (Philadelphia)
Julia Wright, International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal (Paris, France)
Conversation with Mumia Abu Jamal on Uprising Radio
KPFK Los Angeles -- August 1, 2007
Listen to the audio at the Uprising Radio website.
In a follow-up to our story in May about the case of Mumia Abu Jamal being heard by the 3rd Circuit US Court of Appeals, we present an interview with the man himself. Abu Jamal has been in prison for over two decades for the murder of Daniel Faulkner, a white police officer in Philadelphia. He enjoys widespread support among grassroots groups in the US and internationally. He has written several books, including Live From Death Row, Death Blossoms, and We Want Freedom. Abu Jamal also regularly records radio commentaries through Prison Radio which you hear often on Uprising and other Pacifica programs. I recently had the opportunity to present him with a series of questions through radio producer Noelle Hanrahan who runs Prison Radio.org Mumia recorded his answers to my questions via telephone from prison. Here is a edited version of our "conversation."
-- Hans Bennett
Sonali Kolhatkar: I'd like to ask you to reflect briefly on one aspect of your achievements in prison, specifically, the radio commentaries. What impact has writing and recording the commentaries had on your life:
Mumia Abu-Jamal: It has allowed me to respond to the events in our lives and to become a voice of affirmation that is missing in the mass corporate press. It has affirmed me both politically and professionally as one who speaks truth to power.
Sonali: You recently recorded a lengthy commentary about rap for the recent US Social Forum. What is your opinion of hip-hop as a means of social expression for youth? Do you think seasoned activists appreciate enough the importance of hip-hop?
Mumia: Hip-hop is a powerful form of social expression for youth. But, one wonders, what's being expressed? While youth may be masters of the art form, they aren't masters of content. Thus, this form has been, in many ways, hi-jacked to serve corporate interests above communal interests. I don't think seasoned activists (I guess that's polite for geezers, like me) really appreciate Hip-hop's importance, which is interesting because Capitalism has latched onto it to sell everything from cars to swimming pools. It's the soundtrack for millions of young folks. Years ago, the Black Panther Party used some of its more talented members to form bands to try to put out the message. While they didn't threaten the careers of the Temptations or Aretha Franklin, they did touch folks in ways that newspapers didn't. Movement folks need to scoop up or even train younger folks to use their skills for movement purposes.
Sonali: Recently, you filed a commentary about women's tennis, based on Venus Williams' Wimbledon win. It stood out from your usual political commentaries on foreign and domestic policy. Are you a tennis fan? What motivated you to write it?
Mumia: I am a tennis fan, well, a women's tennis fan. This is my second piece on Venus Williams. What she did was truly remarkable, not just in a world of tennis but in the world of sports. I recently did a piece on Barry Bonds and, while I'm hardly a baseball fan, sports is a central issue in the lives and fantasies of millions. It shouldn't be ignored by political folks. Our social and political lives are usually deeply linked to the sports world.
Sonali: How is your role as journalist influenced by your status as an imprisoned person?
Mumia: This is one helluva beat! And, it's one that most media seriously ignores. Over two million folks in prison and media studiously ignores it. Why? Most folks know what they think they know about prisons from shows like Oz. Most prisoners look at those shows and almost die laughing.
Sonali: The corporate media has mostly been silent on your case, especially recently regarding the latest hearing. When they do cover it, they commonly refer to you as a "convicted cop killer". Yet, your support internationally continues to burgeon. Do you attribute this to the power of independent media?
Mumia: I think indy media is obviously important but also, since the war, millions of folks have learned in ways that are undeniable that the corporate media doesn't tell the truth, even when it comes to the most important issues facing a nation, war and peace. Now if that's the case when it comes to war, what about everyday issues of social justice?
Sonali: Regarding the various books you've published over the years, what role has book writing played in your ability to express yourself to the outside world? Are you working on any new books?
Mumia: Books are flights of freedom and perhaps one of the last free media around. I'm writing about jailhouse lawyers, truly an unknown breed who have helped many folks find freedom or a touch of civil rights.
Sonali: You have faced the death penalty for many years and in the US there has been a love-hate relationship with this method of punishment. Despite some recent high profile executions, like that of Tookie Williams, there seems to be a waning of support of the death penalty, particularly with some states considering banning it. Are you optimistic that Americans may be starting to reject it?
Mumia: For many folks, there's a great deal of ambivalence on the death penalty and I think the events in Illinois a few years ago and other cases like the Duke rape case, causes folks to question the state. 8b. Because it's time; it's the right thing to do. Public support is always important. I thank you for your time and your interest and I thank those listeners who are my supporters for their loving support. On the move – long live John Africa.
Special Thanks to Julie Svendsen for transcribing this interview
and to Noelle Hanrahan for coordinating and recording this interview.
Hans Bennett is a journalist based in Philadelphia and co-founder of Journalists for Mumia. He attended the May 18th 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals Hearing of Mumia's case. The hearing was attended by many high-profile supporters of Mumia Abu Jamal. In the moments after the hearing ended Hans Bennett interviewed Ward Churchill, Ramona Africa, and German Parliamentarian, Volker Ratzmann.
Listen to the audio at the Uprising Radio website.
In a follow-up to our story in May about the case of Mumia Abu Jamal being heard by the 3rd Circuit US Court of Appeals, we present an interview with the man himself. Abu Jamal has been in prison for over two decades for the murder of Daniel Faulkner, a white police officer in Philadelphia. He enjoys widespread support among grassroots groups in the US and internationally. He has written several books, including Live From Death Row, Death Blossoms, and We Want Freedom. Abu Jamal also regularly records radio commentaries through Prison Radio which you hear often on Uprising and other Pacifica programs. I recently had the opportunity to present him with a series of questions through radio producer Noelle Hanrahan who runs Prison Radio.org Mumia recorded his answers to my questions via telephone from prison. Here is a edited version of our "conversation."
-- Hans Bennett
Sonali Kolhatkar: I'd like to ask you to reflect briefly on one aspect of your achievements in prison, specifically, the radio commentaries. What impact has writing and recording the commentaries had on your life:
Mumia Abu-Jamal: It has allowed me to respond to the events in our lives and to become a voice of affirmation that is missing in the mass corporate press. It has affirmed me both politically and professionally as one who speaks truth to power.
Sonali: You recently recorded a lengthy commentary about rap for the recent US Social Forum. What is your opinion of hip-hop as a means of social expression for youth? Do you think seasoned activists appreciate enough the importance of hip-hop?
Mumia: Hip-hop is a powerful form of social expression for youth. But, one wonders, what's being expressed? While youth may be masters of the art form, they aren't masters of content. Thus, this form has been, in many ways, hi-jacked to serve corporate interests above communal interests. I don't think seasoned activists (I guess that's polite for geezers, like me) really appreciate Hip-hop's importance, which is interesting because Capitalism has latched onto it to sell everything from cars to swimming pools. It's the soundtrack for millions of young folks. Years ago, the Black Panther Party used some of its more talented members to form bands to try to put out the message. While they didn't threaten the careers of the Temptations or Aretha Franklin, they did touch folks in ways that newspapers didn't. Movement folks need to scoop up or even train younger folks to use their skills for movement purposes.
Sonali: Recently, you filed a commentary about women's tennis, based on Venus Williams' Wimbledon win. It stood out from your usual political commentaries on foreign and domestic policy. Are you a tennis fan? What motivated you to write it?
Mumia: I am a tennis fan, well, a women's tennis fan. This is my second piece on Venus Williams. What she did was truly remarkable, not just in a world of tennis but in the world of sports. I recently did a piece on Barry Bonds and, while I'm hardly a baseball fan, sports is a central issue in the lives and fantasies of millions. It shouldn't be ignored by political folks. Our social and political lives are usually deeply linked to the sports world.
Sonali: How is your role as journalist influenced by your status as an imprisoned person?
Mumia: This is one helluva beat! And, it's one that most media seriously ignores. Over two million folks in prison and media studiously ignores it. Why? Most folks know what they think they know about prisons from shows like Oz. Most prisoners look at those shows and almost die laughing.
Sonali: The corporate media has mostly been silent on your case, especially recently regarding the latest hearing. When they do cover it, they commonly refer to you as a "convicted cop killer". Yet, your support internationally continues to burgeon. Do you attribute this to the power of independent media?
Mumia: I think indy media is obviously important but also, since the war, millions of folks have learned in ways that are undeniable that the corporate media doesn't tell the truth, even when it comes to the most important issues facing a nation, war and peace. Now if that's the case when it comes to war, what about everyday issues of social justice?
Sonali: Regarding the various books you've published over the years, what role has book writing played in your ability to express yourself to the outside world? Are you working on any new books?
Mumia: Books are flights of freedom and perhaps one of the last free media around. I'm writing about jailhouse lawyers, truly an unknown breed who have helped many folks find freedom or a touch of civil rights.
Sonali: You have faced the death penalty for many years and in the US there has been a love-hate relationship with this method of punishment. Despite some recent high profile executions, like that of Tookie Williams, there seems to be a waning of support of the death penalty, particularly with some states considering banning it. Are you optimistic that Americans may be starting to reject it?
Mumia: For many folks, there's a great deal of ambivalence on the death penalty and I think the events in Illinois a few years ago and other cases like the Duke rape case, causes folks to question the state. 8b. Because it's time; it's the right thing to do. Public support is always important. I thank you for your time and your interest and I thank those listeners who are my supporters for their loving support. On the move – long live John Africa.
Special Thanks to Julie Svendsen for transcribing this interview
and to Noelle Hanrahan for coordinating and recording this interview.
Hans Bennett is a journalist based in Philadelphia and co-founder of Journalists for Mumia. He attended the May 18th 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals Hearing of Mumia's case. The hearing was attended by many high-profile supporters of Mumia Abu Jamal. In the moments after the hearing ended Hans Bennett interviewed Ward Churchill, Ramona Africa, and German Parliamentarian, Volker Ratzmann.
Mumia Abu-Jamal Interview with Margaret Prescod
Listen to the full Pacifica program
View the PDF file of the transcribed interview, with numerous graphics at: http://againstthecrimeofsilence.de/News/Mumia-July-2007.pdf
Interview with Margaret Prescod for Her KPFK Program "Sojourner Truth"
July 2007
Margaret Prescod: On behalf of Pacifica Radio Network, Mumia Abu-Jamal, thank you so much for joining us.
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Thank you for the invitation, Margaret.
MP: Mumia, people argue over how you should be defined: as a taxi driver, as an investigative journalist, Black Panther, black militant, jailhouse lawyer – how do you see yourself?
MAJ: Well, in a way, all of those things and more. I mean, when people argue, sometimes people argue for simplicity, when life is rarely that simple. Life is complex. All of those things, many other things, an herbalist, a jailhouse lawyer, a writer, a poet – not a great one, but I try –, a father, a grandˇfather, a husband; you know, all of those things are correct.
MP: Can you say how you manage to get the information and the focus to do the weekly commentaries that are played on more than 100 radio stations around the country?
MAJ: I read, quite a bit, good, interesting books on political subjects, sometimes history books, I try to read several newspapers, and also try to keep my eye on what's happening here, around me, so you know sometimes a local story is better than, say, a commentary on the war [laughs]. So you don't loose your journalist's eye. This is just, I guess, another beat, so to speak.
MP: How do you structure your day? About how many hours a day you have outside, and how do you use that time?
MAJ: Death row is what is actually in many states comparable to what's called solitary confinement. By that I mean you're in a cell by yourself, solitary. And with the exception of two hours a day, when you're in a cage; some people call it yard, but I think the proper reference is, cage, you're either alone or with one other person.
So, for 22 hours a day, that's a lot of time to think, to read, to write, and so, while it may astound a lot of people, I actually have probably more time [laughs] than the average reporter or the average commentator working on a radio station or for a general publication.
MP: So in terms of strucˇturing the 22 hours you're spending reading, writˇing, and thinking etc. and then the two hours you have some time for some exercise, perhaps…
MAJ: Yes, yeah. Well, exercise in a cage really means, sometimes jogging around, doing pushups and what have you. For me, I've become an aficionado of handball. That's like tennis without rackets. [Both laugh] And it's very vigorous, it's a good workout, and usually three days a week, I'm able to get a good game, and I got a very, very good set-up game early this morning.
MP: How has prison life changed in the last quarter of a century?
MAJ: In ways that were not conceivable certainly over 30 years ago. It was unthinkable then that several decades later, we would be looking at, let's say, roughly three million people, you know, that there are more people in the prison system in the state where you're at, in California, right now than in the whole country of France. It's crazy, I mean, it's un – you couldn't even conceive of those kinds of numbers.
So in the last quarter of a century, what we're really looking at is what many people have come to call the prison-industrial complex. There is a great deal of money, there's a great deal of business, there's a great deal of social power to be gained by the prison industry, in this sense, that many of the people who people the prisons, who populate the prisons, come from the urban core, the cities, and they're transported to the rural districts, where population has traditionally been very sparse.
But what a lot of people don't know is that everybody in prison is counted as part not just of the census, but of political districts, and if you want to talk about a cause of revolution being taxation without representation, or at least counting without representation – we're counted in congressional districts, but obviously, you know, our voices, our concerns, our livelihood – none of our interests are counted when it comes to those people whose numbers help get them elected, so to speak.
MP: When you are inside, Mumia, and your major supporters are outside, there's a real problem. How do you give direction to their support work?
MAJ: Usually in personal ways, and that is writing letters to people and just calling people up and talk to them, and usually also through supporters, who are able to communicate at a deeper, more intense level with younger supporters. We work people to people, you know, person to person, that's the only real effective way I think to really arm someone to do this very arduous task of being an anti-prison activist.
MP: What about how you see your case in influencing that of other prisoners?
MAJ: That's difficult to assess because it's difficult to communicate farther than people on your block. It's difficult also for people outside of prison to understand how truly isolated people are in some prison systems because of the differences in terms of construction with new prisons as opposed to old prisons.
In the old prisons, people were able to communicate and move around far better and easier than they are now. The new prisons have been built and constructed with an eye towards isolating people. So there might be a guy on the next block, but you may not see that person for six months, a year, I mean it's really quite that isolated, so it's difficult to communicate beyond what you can see on your own part of your own block.
MP: What are the older prisoners like in contrast to the younger prisoners? I mean, is there a difference that you have noted between those who have been inside for a long time, and the newer prisoners coming in? How do the younger prisoners compare with what you are like, for example?
MAJ: Well, when I came in, I was considerably older than many of the young people who are coming in now. I was 27, 28 years old, which sounds like a kid to me now, but when you consider that many of the guys coming in now are in their late teens or 20, 21, this means that there's a profound difference between then and now.
Many of the older guys tend to be – ah, I have to say many, not all – but many tend to be more settled, more sober, and I think more patient, more conscious – that I think is a safe assessment. Many of the younger guys, especially in more recent years, it isn't just that they're younger, but that they come from a situation that is far more dire, far more provocative than those of the ones who came maybe 20 years from now.
By that I mean, the situation in many communities, especially, let us say in Philadelphia, is far more dangerous, far more economically unstable, far more socially disastrous frankly, than it has been 20 years ago. You can see that when you meet young people who really, I think, are in a constant state of rage, in a constant state of an inability, an unwillingness to listen to older people.
MP: Now, turning to your situatˇion… I'd like you to tell us a little bit about this push for a new trial. Your legal team and your supporˇters are pressing for a new trial. Why a new trial, and why now?
MAJ: Why now? Well, of course, it didn't begin now. We've been fightˇing for that for many years, in many places across the state, and many courtrooms. We've only been in the federal courts for the last, almost the last decade, but certainly since 2001, since the ruling came down. We're now, of course, in the Court of Appeals.
We're fighting for a new trial, and I am reminded when I think of our new trial of what a former attorney who was on the case used to say: We're fighting for, not just a new trial, but a true trial, because in front of the former judge, Albert F. Sabo, who was a life member of the Fraternal Order of Police, who was referred to by many people who've practiced in front of him as a "prosecutor in black robes," it cannot be said that that was a true, reasonable, fair, just trial by any standard.
MP: If you are granted a new trial, can we expect to hear anything new?
MAJ: I think we will hear a great deal that is new. I said, many years ago, that the jury didn't hear a great many things, and heard things that were, frankly, quite unfair, untrue, and not representative. I said that in 1982 to the jury. I think if we have a new trial, we can prove that.
MP: And if you're denied your right to a new trial?
MAJ: I am not a negative person. I don't think in negative terms. That's simply not my nature; I can honestly say that I'm not a person who is pollyannaish – but I think that we have made a good, strong case! And I think the results will be good.
MP: How do you keep yourself together, Mumia? I mean, it's been 25 years, you've been through all of this miscarriage of justice, the overwhelming racism in the first trial – and now here you are on the battle front again, struggling for a new trial. How do you keep yourself together?
MAJ: I guess I can best be described as a busy person. It's not a new thing, but it's a true thing; I've always been the kind of person who feels like there is not enough hours in the day, 24 hours certainly isn't not enough. I always have projects unfinished, requests that cannot be met, letters that have not been [laughs] written frankly that I thought were written, art that I want to draft or draw or paint, pieces that I want to write – so, there are many hours in the day, and I try to use them well, but I've always been busy, and I think that's helpful.
Also, I've been surrounded by extraordinary people. I've met extraordinary people. From my first day, many years ago, down in Philadelphia, in the county, all across the state. Extraordinary men, on death row. And I have also met people from many walks of life, who are remarkable, men and women, writers, activists, you name it. So that has been helpful – that has been very helpful.
MP: Are you hopeful?
MAJ: I'm always hopeful, believe that. [Both laugh.] You know, people can't escape their essential nature. Well I said I'm not pollyannaish, but I've always been hopeful, and that's just how I look at the world.
MP: Certainly that comes across. Anything else you would like to say to those who are listening around the country and online indeed around the world?
MAJ: I just wish people would understand that I am very, very appreciative and thankful for the many expresˇsions of love and support that I've seen from people for many years. Every day I get letters; unfortunately, I can't answer them all, but I try to read them all. I've had a problem in the last weeks because about seven times a week at least I get letters from friends in Germany, but I, I am not quite able to read German yet! [Both laugh.] So I can't say I've read it all!
But I wish I could tell those people, you know, one on one, thank you! Thank you for taking the time to write to me, thank you for your thoughts, thank you for the good wishes, and thank you for the love and support. That I apˇpreciate it, that I feel it, and I'm immensely grateful.
MP: Mumia Abu-Jamal, thank you so very much for joining us.
MAJ: Thank you, Margaret.
Transcript & design: Michael Schiffmann
http://www.againstthecrimeofsilence.de
http://www.abu-jamal-news.com
View the PDF file of the transcribed interview, with numerous graphics at: http://againstthecrimeofsilence.de/News/Mumia-July-2007.pdf
Interview with Margaret Prescod for Her KPFK Program "Sojourner Truth"
July 2007
Margaret Prescod: On behalf of Pacifica Radio Network, Mumia Abu-Jamal, thank you so much for joining us.
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Thank you for the invitation, Margaret.
MP: Mumia, people argue over how you should be defined: as a taxi driver, as an investigative journalist, Black Panther, black militant, jailhouse lawyer – how do you see yourself?
MAJ: Well, in a way, all of those things and more. I mean, when people argue, sometimes people argue for simplicity, when life is rarely that simple. Life is complex. All of those things, many other things, an herbalist, a jailhouse lawyer, a writer, a poet – not a great one, but I try –, a father, a grandˇfather, a husband; you know, all of those things are correct.
MP: Can you say how you manage to get the information and the focus to do the weekly commentaries that are played on more than 100 radio stations around the country?
MAJ: I read, quite a bit, good, interesting books on political subjects, sometimes history books, I try to read several newspapers, and also try to keep my eye on what's happening here, around me, so you know sometimes a local story is better than, say, a commentary on the war [laughs]. So you don't loose your journalist's eye. This is just, I guess, another beat, so to speak.
MP: How do you structure your day? About how many hours a day you have outside, and how do you use that time?
MAJ: Death row is what is actually in many states comparable to what's called solitary confinement. By that I mean you're in a cell by yourself, solitary. And with the exception of two hours a day, when you're in a cage; some people call it yard, but I think the proper reference is, cage, you're either alone or with one other person.
So, for 22 hours a day, that's a lot of time to think, to read, to write, and so, while it may astound a lot of people, I actually have probably more time [laughs] than the average reporter or the average commentator working on a radio station or for a general publication.
MP: So in terms of strucˇturing the 22 hours you're spending reading, writˇing, and thinking etc. and then the two hours you have some time for some exercise, perhaps…
MAJ: Yes, yeah. Well, exercise in a cage really means, sometimes jogging around, doing pushups and what have you. For me, I've become an aficionado of handball. That's like tennis without rackets. [Both laugh] And it's very vigorous, it's a good workout, and usually three days a week, I'm able to get a good game, and I got a very, very good set-up game early this morning.
MP: How has prison life changed in the last quarter of a century?
MAJ: In ways that were not conceivable certainly over 30 years ago. It was unthinkable then that several decades later, we would be looking at, let's say, roughly three million people, you know, that there are more people in the prison system in the state where you're at, in California, right now than in the whole country of France. It's crazy, I mean, it's un – you couldn't even conceive of those kinds of numbers.
So in the last quarter of a century, what we're really looking at is what many people have come to call the prison-industrial complex. There is a great deal of money, there's a great deal of business, there's a great deal of social power to be gained by the prison industry, in this sense, that many of the people who people the prisons, who populate the prisons, come from the urban core, the cities, and they're transported to the rural districts, where population has traditionally been very sparse.
But what a lot of people don't know is that everybody in prison is counted as part not just of the census, but of political districts, and if you want to talk about a cause of revolution being taxation without representation, or at least counting without representation – we're counted in congressional districts, but obviously, you know, our voices, our concerns, our livelihood – none of our interests are counted when it comes to those people whose numbers help get them elected, so to speak.
MP: When you are inside, Mumia, and your major supporters are outside, there's a real problem. How do you give direction to their support work?
MAJ: Usually in personal ways, and that is writing letters to people and just calling people up and talk to them, and usually also through supporters, who are able to communicate at a deeper, more intense level with younger supporters. We work people to people, you know, person to person, that's the only real effective way I think to really arm someone to do this very arduous task of being an anti-prison activist.
MP: What about how you see your case in influencing that of other prisoners?
MAJ: That's difficult to assess because it's difficult to communicate farther than people on your block. It's difficult also for people outside of prison to understand how truly isolated people are in some prison systems because of the differences in terms of construction with new prisons as opposed to old prisons.
In the old prisons, people were able to communicate and move around far better and easier than they are now. The new prisons have been built and constructed with an eye towards isolating people. So there might be a guy on the next block, but you may not see that person for six months, a year, I mean it's really quite that isolated, so it's difficult to communicate beyond what you can see on your own part of your own block.
MP: What are the older prisoners like in contrast to the younger prisoners? I mean, is there a difference that you have noted between those who have been inside for a long time, and the newer prisoners coming in? How do the younger prisoners compare with what you are like, for example?
MAJ: Well, when I came in, I was considerably older than many of the young people who are coming in now. I was 27, 28 years old, which sounds like a kid to me now, but when you consider that many of the guys coming in now are in their late teens or 20, 21, this means that there's a profound difference between then and now.
Many of the older guys tend to be – ah, I have to say many, not all – but many tend to be more settled, more sober, and I think more patient, more conscious – that I think is a safe assessment. Many of the younger guys, especially in more recent years, it isn't just that they're younger, but that they come from a situation that is far more dire, far more provocative than those of the ones who came maybe 20 years from now.
By that I mean, the situation in many communities, especially, let us say in Philadelphia, is far more dangerous, far more economically unstable, far more socially disastrous frankly, than it has been 20 years ago. You can see that when you meet young people who really, I think, are in a constant state of rage, in a constant state of an inability, an unwillingness to listen to older people.
MP: Now, turning to your situatˇion… I'd like you to tell us a little bit about this push for a new trial. Your legal team and your supporˇters are pressing for a new trial. Why a new trial, and why now?
MAJ: Why now? Well, of course, it didn't begin now. We've been fightˇing for that for many years, in many places across the state, and many courtrooms. We've only been in the federal courts for the last, almost the last decade, but certainly since 2001, since the ruling came down. We're now, of course, in the Court of Appeals.
We're fighting for a new trial, and I am reminded when I think of our new trial of what a former attorney who was on the case used to say: We're fighting for, not just a new trial, but a true trial, because in front of the former judge, Albert F. Sabo, who was a life member of the Fraternal Order of Police, who was referred to by many people who've practiced in front of him as a "prosecutor in black robes," it cannot be said that that was a true, reasonable, fair, just trial by any standard.
MP: If you are granted a new trial, can we expect to hear anything new?
MAJ: I think we will hear a great deal that is new. I said, many years ago, that the jury didn't hear a great many things, and heard things that were, frankly, quite unfair, untrue, and not representative. I said that in 1982 to the jury. I think if we have a new trial, we can prove that.
MP: And if you're denied your right to a new trial?
MAJ: I am not a negative person. I don't think in negative terms. That's simply not my nature; I can honestly say that I'm not a person who is pollyannaish – but I think that we have made a good, strong case! And I think the results will be good.
MP: How do you keep yourself together, Mumia? I mean, it's been 25 years, you've been through all of this miscarriage of justice, the overwhelming racism in the first trial – and now here you are on the battle front again, struggling for a new trial. How do you keep yourself together?
MAJ: I guess I can best be described as a busy person. It's not a new thing, but it's a true thing; I've always been the kind of person who feels like there is not enough hours in the day, 24 hours certainly isn't not enough. I always have projects unfinished, requests that cannot be met, letters that have not been [laughs] written frankly that I thought were written, art that I want to draft or draw or paint, pieces that I want to write – so, there are many hours in the day, and I try to use them well, but I've always been busy, and I think that's helpful.
Also, I've been surrounded by extraordinary people. I've met extraordinary people. From my first day, many years ago, down in Philadelphia, in the county, all across the state. Extraordinary men, on death row. And I have also met people from many walks of life, who are remarkable, men and women, writers, activists, you name it. So that has been helpful – that has been very helpful.
MP: Are you hopeful?
MAJ: I'm always hopeful, believe that. [Both laugh.] You know, people can't escape their essential nature. Well I said I'm not pollyannaish, but I've always been hopeful, and that's just how I look at the world.
MP: Certainly that comes across. Anything else you would like to say to those who are listening around the country and online indeed around the world?
MAJ: I just wish people would understand that I am very, very appreciative and thankful for the many expresˇsions of love and support that I've seen from people for many years. Every day I get letters; unfortunately, I can't answer them all, but I try to read them all. I've had a problem in the last weeks because about seven times a week at least I get letters from friends in Germany, but I, I am not quite able to read German yet! [Both laugh.] So I can't say I've read it all!
But I wish I could tell those people, you know, one on one, thank you! Thank you for taking the time to write to me, thank you for your thoughts, thank you for the good wishes, and thank you for the love and support. That I apˇpreciate it, that I feel it, and I'm immensely grateful.
MP: Mumia Abu-Jamal, thank you so very much for joining us.
MAJ: Thank you, Margaret.
Transcript & design: Michael Schiffmann
http://www.againstthecrimeofsilence.de
http://www.abu-jamal-news.com
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Legal Update
Dear Friends:
On May 17, 2007, we presented oral argument in the U.S. Court of Appeal of the Third Circuit, Philadelphia, on behalf of Mumia Abu-Jamal. Abu-Jamal v. Horn, U.S. Court of Appeals Nos. 01-9014, 02-9001 (death penalty). It was an extraordinary day in my experience of three decades of death penalty litigation. This was certainly the most promising legal proceeding since the arrest of my client over 25 years ago. At last there is light at the end of the tunnel. Even though there is no way to know when or how the federal court will rule, the three-judge panel's numerous questions certainly reflected their concern about what the prosecution had done wrong. A decision could be forthcoming anytime from mid-July to the fall.
It was encouraging to see the courtroom packed with supporters for my client. A large crowd also waited outside during the hearing. There were international observers from various countries including France, and a prominent human rights lawyer from Berlin who is also a member of the German parliament.
The focus of the federal court was on issues concerning the death penalty, misrepresentations by the prosecutor in his argument to the jury, and his racism in jury selection. The atmosphere was far different than previously experienced in this case, as reflected by the judges' overriding concern regarding misconduct by the prosecution. Early on one judge asked opposing counsel in reference to the prosecutor's misrepresentations to the jury during the 1982 trial: "Isn't that a denial of one of the rights secured by the Bill of Rights?" I therefore concluded the hearing by pointing out that even though it is judicially recognized that the Philadelphia District Attorney employed racism in cases both before and after that of Mr. Abu-Jamal, can anyone seriously believe that racism was not at work in this case involving an outspoken journalist who was a former member of the Black Panther Party and a supporter of MOVE's right to exist.
Even though Mr. Abu-Jamal began writing me in 1986, it was not until 2003 that I was finally able to agree to take over as lead counsel. Since then my focus has been on raising his level of credibility, convincing courts to give serious consideration to the many constitutional violations what have occurred in this complex case, and overcoming the errors of the past case lawyers. To date we have been largely successful. Interestingly, every motion I have filed since briefing was ordered federally has been granted.
Oral argument aimed to calmly and candidly dealing with the questions and concerns of the judges. It was not a time for political speeches or emotional-type arguments which I have successfully made before juries in countless murder cases. All possible arguments with supporting legal authority were previously made in our extensive written briefs. Supporting us with excellent briefs and argument was the NAACP's Legal Defense Fund, and the National Lawyers Guild, both of whom I brought into the case some years ago.
People frequently ask what can happen now. The federal court's choices involve various scenarios. These include remanding the case back to the U.S. District Court for further hearings, or granting an entirely new trial, or ordering a new jury trial limited to the penalty issue of life or death, or denying all relief with the case headed towards an execution. Our objective is a reversal of the conviction and death sentence, and the granting of a new trial.
The primary problem we have experienced in Mr. Abu-Jamal's case, in additional to prosecution misconduct and racism, has been mistakes made by prior counsel ranging from not pursing an adequate investigation to failing to raise certain fundamental issues, e.g., judicial bias at trial. This has been evident in the federal appeal, accentuated by some of the judges' questions on May 17. We have taken all possible steps to overcome these shortcomings.
The issues in the case of Mr. Abu-Jamal concern the right to a fair trial, the struggle against the death penalty, and the political repression of an outspoken journalist. Racism and politics are threads that have run through this case since his 1981 arrest. The issues under consideration, all of great constitutional significance, are:
Whether Mr. Abu-Jamal was denied the right to due process of law and a fair trial under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution because of the prosecutor's "appeal-after-appeal" argument which encouraged the jury to disregard the presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt, and err on the side of guilt.
Whether the prosecution's use of peremptory challenges to exclude African Americans from sitting on the jury violated Mr. Abu-Jamal's rights to due process and equal protection of the law under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, and contravened Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).
Whether the jury instructions and verdict form that resulted in the death penalty deprived Mr. Abu-Jamal of rights guaranteed by the Eight and Fourteenth Amendments to due process of law, equal protection of the law, and not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment, and violated Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367 (1988), since the judge precluded the jurors from considering any mitigating evidence unless they all agreed on the existence of a particular circumstance.
Whether Mr. Abu-Jamal was denied due process and equal protection of the law under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments during post-conviction hearings as the result of the bias and racism of Judge Albert F. Sabo which included the comment that he was "going to help'em fry the nigger."
It is a pleasure to announce that we are once more engaged in briefing before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. On June 1, 2007, we filed on behalf of Mr. Abu-Jamal the opening Brief for Appellant. Commonwealth v. Abu-Jamal, Pa. Sup. Ct. No. 485, Capital Appeals Div. (death penalty). The issues presented include the prosecution falsely manipulating eyewitness testimony, and its use of fabricated evidence. There are procedural problems which occurred before I entered the case, these are issues of such constitutional importance that they must be aggressively pursued. A copy of our brief is attached.*
I am in this case to win a new and fair trial for Mr. Abu-Jamal. That is his and my wish. The goal is for his freedom following a retrial. Nevertheless, Mr. Abu-Jamal remains in great danger. If all is lost, he will be executed.
Your interest in this struggle for human rights and against the death penalty is appreciated.
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
London
[Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117]
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
* Download the brief at http://www.freemumia.com/pdfs/june2007.pdf
On May 17, 2007, we presented oral argument in the U.S. Court of Appeal of the Third Circuit, Philadelphia, on behalf of Mumia Abu-Jamal. Abu-Jamal v. Horn, U.S. Court of Appeals Nos. 01-9014, 02-9001 (death penalty). It was an extraordinary day in my experience of three decades of death penalty litigation. This was certainly the most promising legal proceeding since the arrest of my client over 25 years ago. At last there is light at the end of the tunnel. Even though there is no way to know when or how the federal court will rule, the three-judge panel's numerous questions certainly reflected their concern about what the prosecution had done wrong. A decision could be forthcoming anytime from mid-July to the fall.
It was encouraging to see the courtroom packed with supporters for my client. A large crowd also waited outside during the hearing. There were international observers from various countries including France, and a prominent human rights lawyer from Berlin who is also a member of the German parliament.
The focus of the federal court was on issues concerning the death penalty, misrepresentations by the prosecutor in his argument to the jury, and his racism in jury selection. The atmosphere was far different than previously experienced in this case, as reflected by the judges' overriding concern regarding misconduct by the prosecution. Early on one judge asked opposing counsel in reference to the prosecutor's misrepresentations to the jury during the 1982 trial: "Isn't that a denial of one of the rights secured by the Bill of Rights?" I therefore concluded the hearing by pointing out that even though it is judicially recognized that the Philadelphia District Attorney employed racism in cases both before and after that of Mr. Abu-Jamal, can anyone seriously believe that racism was not at work in this case involving an outspoken journalist who was a former member of the Black Panther Party and a supporter of MOVE's right to exist.
Even though Mr. Abu-Jamal began writing me in 1986, it was not until 2003 that I was finally able to agree to take over as lead counsel. Since then my focus has been on raising his level of credibility, convincing courts to give serious consideration to the many constitutional violations what have occurred in this complex case, and overcoming the errors of the past case lawyers. To date we have been largely successful. Interestingly, every motion I have filed since briefing was ordered federally has been granted.
Oral argument aimed to calmly and candidly dealing with the questions and concerns of the judges. It was not a time for political speeches or emotional-type arguments which I have successfully made before juries in countless murder cases. All possible arguments with supporting legal authority were previously made in our extensive written briefs. Supporting us with excellent briefs and argument was the NAACP's Legal Defense Fund, and the National Lawyers Guild, both of whom I brought into the case some years ago.
People frequently ask what can happen now. The federal court's choices involve various scenarios. These include remanding the case back to the U.S. District Court for further hearings, or granting an entirely new trial, or ordering a new jury trial limited to the penalty issue of life or death, or denying all relief with the case headed towards an execution. Our objective is a reversal of the conviction and death sentence, and the granting of a new trial.
The primary problem we have experienced in Mr. Abu-Jamal's case, in additional to prosecution misconduct and racism, has been mistakes made by prior counsel ranging from not pursing an adequate investigation to failing to raise certain fundamental issues, e.g., judicial bias at trial. This has been evident in the federal appeal, accentuated by some of the judges' questions on May 17. We have taken all possible steps to overcome these shortcomings.
The issues in the case of Mr. Abu-Jamal concern the right to a fair trial, the struggle against the death penalty, and the political repression of an outspoken journalist. Racism and politics are threads that have run through this case since his 1981 arrest. The issues under consideration, all of great constitutional significance, are:
Whether Mr. Abu-Jamal was denied the right to due process of law and a fair trial under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution because of the prosecutor's "appeal-after-appeal" argument which encouraged the jury to disregard the presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt, and err on the side of guilt.
Whether the prosecution's use of peremptory challenges to exclude African Americans from sitting on the jury violated Mr. Abu-Jamal's rights to due process and equal protection of the law under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, and contravened Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).
Whether the jury instructions and verdict form that resulted in the death penalty deprived Mr. Abu-Jamal of rights guaranteed by the Eight and Fourteenth Amendments to due process of law, equal protection of the law, and not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment, and violated Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367 (1988), since the judge precluded the jurors from considering any mitigating evidence unless they all agreed on the existence of a particular circumstance.
Whether Mr. Abu-Jamal was denied due process and equal protection of the law under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments during post-conviction hearings as the result of the bias and racism of Judge Albert F. Sabo which included the comment that he was "going to help'em fry the nigger."
It is a pleasure to announce that we are once more engaged in briefing before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. On June 1, 2007, we filed on behalf of Mr. Abu-Jamal the opening Brief for Appellant. Commonwealth v. Abu-Jamal, Pa. Sup. Ct. No. 485, Capital Appeals Div. (death penalty). The issues presented include the prosecution falsely manipulating eyewitness testimony, and its use of fabricated evidence. There are procedural problems which occurred before I entered the case, these are issues of such constitutional importance that they must be aggressively pursued. A copy of our brief is attached.*
I am in this case to win a new and fair trial for Mr. Abu-Jamal. That is his and my wish. The goal is for his freedom following a retrial. Nevertheless, Mr. Abu-Jamal remains in great danger. If all is lost, he will be executed.
Your interest in this struggle for human rights and against the death penalty is appreciated.
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
London
[Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117]
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
* Download the brief at http://www.freemumia.com/pdfs/june2007.pdf
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Photos from June 15 event for the Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Pam AfricaCheck out the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition website for great pictures by lalroohk of the June 15 event calling for the naming of a Harlem Street for Mumia, "...pictures of the very exciting youth-oriented event of the Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal, starring Immortal Technique. Nana Soul, Orie Lumumba, and other young activists joined DeLacy Davis of Black Cops Against Police Brutality, Igwe Williams of the Guillermo Morales-Assat Shakur Center of City College, and an NAACP youth speaker from Jamaica in focusing on Mumia, police terror, and the criminalization of our youth. Strong support for Mumia and the street naming campaign was clearly evident in the many statements the performers and the audience made ending with a rousing statement from Pam Africa about the power of the people, and the demonstration of that power in the streets of Philadelphia on May 17th, as well as the very moving performance and statement from Immortal Technique."
Saturday, June 02, 2007
As lawyers appeal for new trial, rally demands: `FREE MUMIA'
By Betsey Piette
Philadelphia
Published May 24, 2007 12:38 AM
Over a thousand people rallied in support of death row, political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal on May 17 outside the Federal Building in downtown Philadelphia, where a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit convened to hear oral arguments on his right to a new trial.
Around 200 Mumia supporters, including Dick Gregory, former U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, Lynne Stewart, Kathleen Cleaver, and international delegates from France and Germany, were also eyewitnesses on Mumia's behalf inside the courtroom. Abu-Jamal was prohibited from attending this oral hearing.
Participants included busloads from New York and Boston; youth organized by FIST (Fight Imperialism, Stand Together) and Students for a Democratic Society, who traveled overnight from North Carolina; a car caravan from Georgia led by McKinney; and supporters from Richmond, Cleveland and as far away as Los Angeles and San Francisco. However, the overwhelming majority were from the Philadelphia area, many who took off from work to attend.
There were rallies supporting Abu-Jamal in several other U.S. cities (see page 7 round-up article) and demonstrations in many countries around the world, including France, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Germany, the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden and Britain.
The oral arguments were presented before Chief Judge Anthony Scirica and Judge Robert Cowen, both Reagan appointees, and Judge Thomas Ambro, a Clinton appointee. All three appeared to be familiar with the arguments contained in written briefs filed by attorneys prior to the hearing. During their time on the Third Circuit all three have overturned capital convictions based on the same claim Abu-Jamal is making about race-based exclusion of jurors by the prosecution.
Abu-Jamal was represented by Attorneys Robert Bryan and Judith Ritter, along with NAACP Attorney Christina Swarns. They argued that racial bias in jury selection and improper instructions by the prosecutor to the jury during the sentencing phase of Abu-Jamal's 1982 murder trial provided grounds for a new trial. Arguing for the prosecution, Assistant District Attorney Hugh Burns presented the state's appeal of the December 2001 decision by Federal Judge William Yohn that overturned Abu-Jamal's death sentence even though he remains on death row.
Burns, who was the first to present, often referred to Abu-Jamal's court appointed attorney Anthony Jackson and his failure to file a complaint about racism in jury selection during the trial. Jackson, assigned to "represent" Mumia by Judge Albert Sabo, was disbarred in 1992 for drug abuse, yet the state is still using this attorney to prosecute Mumia 25 years later.
Jackson did file a pre-trial motion in March of 1982 requesting information on the racial composition of the entire venire (jury pool) because he strongly suspected that there would be a problem. However, his motion was denied by Sabo, and the fact that Jackson did not raise this concern again during the trial proceedings was used by Burns to argue that it should not be considered today.
The appellate judges devoted considerable time debating whether racism in jury selection could be determined if the racial makeup of the jury pool was unknown. When asked about the racial composition of the jury pool at Abu-Jamal's PCRA (Post Conviction Relief Act) hearing in 1995, Prosecutor Joseph McGill claimed he didn't remember. However, given that African Americans made up 44 percent of the population of Philadelphia in 1982, the fact that less than 15 percent (two out of fourteen) of the jurors at Abu-Jamal's trial were Black should be evidence enough.
The racial composition of the final pool of jurors is known. Twenty-eight out of forty-three were white and fifteen Black. Each side in a trial can use twenty challenges to eliminate potential jurors without stating why; however, these peremptory challenges may not be used to keep members of a particular race off the jury. McGill used 15 peremptory challenges to remove 10 of the 15 remaining Black jurors, but only five of the 28 whites.
An added factor in support of defense claims was the systematic pattern of exclusion of African Americans from juries by Philadelphia prosecutors around the time of Mumia's 1982 trial. This was addressed by Swarns, who presented oral arguments contained in an amicus brief on behalf of Abu-Jamal by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
The LDEF pioneered the affirmative use of civil actions to end jury discrimination. Their 31-page brief, which underscores the seriousness of the evidence of racial discrimination, can be found at www.naacpldf.org/content/pdf/jury/Abu-Jamal_v_Horn_amicus_brief.pdf.
The LDEF brief cites the 1986 case of Batson v. Kentucky, in which the Supreme Court declared that a criminal defendant who is able to prove that his trial prosecutor used peremptory challenges to exclude potential jurors on the basis of race is entitled to a new trial. Attorneys on behalf of Abu-Jamal are asking the Third Circuit Court of Appeals to consider the combination of factors that infer that his was unquestionably a racially charged case.
Case tainted with racism
Abu-Jamal is African-American and the victim was a white policeman. In the months between the Dec. 9, 1981, shooting death of Daniel Faulkner and the July 1982 trial, the local media continually emphasized the racial aspects of the case, particularly Abu-Jamal's membership in the Black Panther Party and his support of the MOVE organization, including the political prisoners known as the MOVE 9.
In his work as a journalist, Abu-Jamal often reported on prisons and police brutality and in one instance publicly challenged then Police Commissioner Frank Rizzo. He also wore his hair in dreadlocks at the time and the LDEF brief cites a Philadelphia Inquirer article from June 10, 1982, which stated, "Several prospective jurors left the courtroom Tuesday saying they were too upset and afraid to serve after being questioned by Abu-Jamal, who wears his hair in the dreadlocks style of the MOVE sect."
Swarns argued that the trial prosecutor in Abu-Jamal's case, Joseph McGill, had a history of systematically striking Black jurors. The LDEF brief notes that "a survey of homicide cases tried by Mr. McGill between September of 1981 and October 1983 reveal that he excluded prospective African-American venire persons approximately three times as often as he excluded non-black prospective jurors."
The brief points out that "A comprehensive statistical study of Philadelphia County death penalty cases tried between 1981 and 1997 reveals that, `in 317 capital trials in Philadelphia between 1981 and 1997, prosecutors struck 51 percent of black jurors and 26 percent of non black jurors.'" Both Swarns and Bryan made reference to a notorious video training tape prepared by Philadelphia D.A. Jack McMahon advocating the systematic exclusion of African-American prospective jurors based on his experience in the D.A.'s office.
Swarns also noted that African-American jurors were struck from the jury pool because they were unemployed, divorced or single parents, yet these criteria were not applied to white jurors. Black jurors were asked if they had heard Abu-Jamal on Black radio stations, yet white jurors were not asked if they had heard Abu-Jamal's commentaries that played on NPR. One African-American man was dismissed because he admitted to having a hearing problem, while a white juror who had to turn up his hearing aid to listen to Prosecutor McGill's questions was allowed to remain.
One African-American woman whom McGill picked for the jury because "she hated Abu-Jamal" was later thrown off by Sabo when she had to attend to a dying pet. She'd asked for a brief time off but was refused. Meanwhile Sabo adjourned the proceedings for an entire afternoon so that a white, male juror could take a civil service exam.
The issue of McGill's clearly inappropriate instructions to jurors during the July 1982 sentencing phase was addressed by Ritter who also questioned the legality of McGill's three-page verdict form.
Each death sentence must rest on two findings: proof beyond a reasonable doubt of at least one aggravating circumstance that would have increased the seriousness of the crime; and the finding that there are no mitigating circumstances sufficiently substantial to call for leniency in sentencing. The verdict form in Abu-Jamal's case consisted of a list of aggravators without any instructions on their application.
While the law doesn't require jurors to be unanimous when it comes to considering mitigating circumstances (for example, positive character witnesses or the fact that the defendant in this case had never been convicted of a crime), the verdict form provided no space for jurors to indicate that some jurors felt these were relevant even if not all agreed upon them.
In fact McGill's instructions gave jurors the impression that they had to be unanimous in order for mitigating circumstances to be considered. In addition, Ritter challenged the constitutionality of McGill's charge to the jury that it was alright if they gave Abu-Jamal the death sentence because he would have "appeal after appeal."
A third appeal by Abu-Jamal's attorneys argued that his 1995 PCRA hearing was constitutionally flawed because the judge—the same Judge Albert Sabo who tried Mumia's original case—was biased in favor of the prosecution. The PCRA transcript shows that Sabo denied subpoenas of witnesses requested by the defense, cut off defense lines of questioning and threatened Abu-Jamal's attorneys with contempt of court when they challenged him. One defense witness who testified to being coerced by prosecutors to lie in the 1982 trial, found herself arrested in the courtroom while she was still on the witness stand in the PCRA hearing.
Sabo's racism and bias against Abu-Jamal is also evidenced by his comment to another judge, "I'm going to help them fry the n****r," overheard by court stenographer Terri Maurer Carter.
`The Mumia rule'
While many of the cases cited as legal precedent by Abu-Jamal's attorneys have been grounds for the reversal of a number of convictions in capital cases, that is no guarantee of a new trial for Abu-Jamal. In a May 15, article by author Dave Lindorff and columnist Linn Washington Jr. titled "Justice System on Trial as Mumia Case Reaches Climax," they point out that over the course of Abu-Jamal's more than two-decade-long appeals process, the courts have shown a willingness to create special exceptions that apply only to him.
They note an example of what might be called `The Mumia Rule' that occurred in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The state's top judges in 1986 overturned a death sentence where McGill had made the same closing arguments to jurors at the conclusion of a murder trial presided over by none other than Sabo.
The state's top court declared that McGill's language had "minimized the jury's sense of responsibility for a verdict of death" and ordered a new trial. Three years later in 1989, this court reversed itself when it came to upholding Abu-Jamal's conviction. Eleven years later in 1997 the court flip-flopped again and barred such language by all prosecutors "in all future trials."
In his closing arguments during the May 17th hearing, defense attorney Robert Bryan made a point of this when he listed defendants whose capital cases have come before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals—Donald Hardcastle, Arnold Holloway, Curtis Brinson and Harold Wilson—whose convictions were overturned because of racial discrimination in the proceedings. "Are we to believe that there was no racism in this highly charged case in which a political Black defendant was accused of killing a white police officer; that his is the exception to the rule?" Bryan charged.
The three white, male judges appeared to take a cavalier view when discussing the "criteria" by which they would decide whether racism was a factor in this case. An example of this was their debate over what percentage of exclusion of African Americans from a jury would constitute "bias." At one point Judge Ambro even acknowledged that the intentional exclusion of even one juror on the basis of race violates Abu-Jamal's constitutional rights.
John Parker, a Mumia supporter who flew in from Los Angeles, told Workers World that "While some have applauded the judges for their `fair attitude' at the hearing, in the first place it's ridiculous that there had to be a hearing since there is more than ample proof that Mumia did not have a fair trial. The judges read the arguments before the trial started. They should have granted a new trial automatically. In the second place, if these judges were really concerned about fairness, truth and decency, they would see more of a sense of urgency in getting Mumia free, not waiting a month or so to make a decision while Mumia remains tortured under the conditions he's placed in on death row."
The judges are expected to return a ruling within the next 45 to 90 days.
Before, during and after the two-hour-plus legal proceedings, demonstrators took to the streets, including marching up Market Street and several times around City Hall, blocking traffic for nearly 30 minutes. The march was led by a sound truck packed with youthful supporters. Along the way, shoppers, motorists and workers on their lunch hour stopped to receive material on the case, ask questions and often express their support by honking their horns and waving their fists in the air.
Widespread support was also evident at three separate events the night before, including a reception at the Friends Center for Cynthia McKinney and the French delegation, a teach-in at Drexel University sponsored by Educators for Mumia, and a jam-packed hip-hop and spoken word performance at the Rotunda featuring Immortal Technique.
This community support is a critical factor in winning freedom for Mumia Abu-Jamal. For all the legal dancing around how the federal courts should weigh the claims raised by the attorneys, many suspect that this case will not be determined on the basis of law, but on the basis of the political movement mobilizing in the streets.
Speaking at the teach-in the night before the appellate hearing and at a public forum the following evening, German author and researcher Michael Schiffman provided stark evidence that a lot of people have lied in order to put Abu-Jamal on Pennsylvania's death row and to keep him there. Schiffman presented a slide show of photos taken by press photographer Pedro Polakoff that exposes police manipulation of the 1981 crime scene and contradicts statements made by key witnesses for the prosecution and is further evidence of prosecutorial misconduct. Schiffman noted, "To bring this to light would put many careers on the line—some in very high places."
Already an on-line petition is being circulated calling on the Third Circuit Court judges to do the right thing and rule in favor of a new trial, but organizing has to be done to raise broader awareness of the facts in the case and to prepare Abu-Jamal's supporters for what comes next. Toward this end, the Philadelphia International Action Center has issued a call for a meeting on May 29 at 7 p.m. at the Calvary Church, 48th and Baltimore in Philadelphia. Call 215-724-1618.
Piette was an eyewitness to the May 17 oral argument.
Articles copyright 1995-2007 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Philadelphia
Published May 24, 2007 12:38 AM
Over a thousand people rallied in support of death row, political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal on May 17 outside the Federal Building in downtown Philadelphia, where a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit convened to hear oral arguments on his right to a new trial.
Around 200 Mumia supporters, including Dick Gregory, former U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, Lynne Stewart, Kathleen Cleaver, and international delegates from France and Germany, were also eyewitnesses on Mumia's behalf inside the courtroom. Abu-Jamal was prohibited from attending this oral hearing.
Participants included busloads from New York and Boston; youth organized by FIST (Fight Imperialism, Stand Together) and Students for a Democratic Society, who traveled overnight from North Carolina; a car caravan from Georgia led by McKinney; and supporters from Richmond, Cleveland and as far away as Los Angeles and San Francisco. However, the overwhelming majority were from the Philadelphia area, many who took off from work to attend.
There were rallies supporting Abu-Jamal in several other U.S. cities (see page 7 round-up article) and demonstrations in many countries around the world, including France, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Germany, the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden and Britain.
The oral arguments were presented before Chief Judge Anthony Scirica and Judge Robert Cowen, both Reagan appointees, and Judge Thomas Ambro, a Clinton appointee. All three appeared to be familiar with the arguments contained in written briefs filed by attorneys prior to the hearing. During their time on the Third Circuit all three have overturned capital convictions based on the same claim Abu-Jamal is making about race-based exclusion of jurors by the prosecution.
Abu-Jamal was represented by Attorneys Robert Bryan and Judith Ritter, along with NAACP Attorney Christina Swarns. They argued that racial bias in jury selection and improper instructions by the prosecutor to the jury during the sentencing phase of Abu-Jamal's 1982 murder trial provided grounds for a new trial. Arguing for the prosecution, Assistant District Attorney Hugh Burns presented the state's appeal of the December 2001 decision by Federal Judge William Yohn that overturned Abu-Jamal's death sentence even though he remains on death row.
Burns, who was the first to present, often referred to Abu-Jamal's court appointed attorney Anthony Jackson and his failure to file a complaint about racism in jury selection during the trial. Jackson, assigned to "represent" Mumia by Judge Albert Sabo, was disbarred in 1992 for drug abuse, yet the state is still using this attorney to prosecute Mumia 25 years later.
Jackson did file a pre-trial motion in March of 1982 requesting information on the racial composition of the entire venire (jury pool) because he strongly suspected that there would be a problem. However, his motion was denied by Sabo, and the fact that Jackson did not raise this concern again during the trial proceedings was used by Burns to argue that it should not be considered today.
The appellate judges devoted considerable time debating whether racism in jury selection could be determined if the racial makeup of the jury pool was unknown. When asked about the racial composition of the jury pool at Abu-Jamal's PCRA (Post Conviction Relief Act) hearing in 1995, Prosecutor Joseph McGill claimed he didn't remember. However, given that African Americans made up 44 percent of the population of Philadelphia in 1982, the fact that less than 15 percent (two out of fourteen) of the jurors at Abu-Jamal's trial were Black should be evidence enough.
The racial composition of the final pool of jurors is known. Twenty-eight out of forty-three were white and fifteen Black. Each side in a trial can use twenty challenges to eliminate potential jurors without stating why; however, these peremptory challenges may not be used to keep members of a particular race off the jury. McGill used 15 peremptory challenges to remove 10 of the 15 remaining Black jurors, but only five of the 28 whites.
An added factor in support of defense claims was the systematic pattern of exclusion of African Americans from juries by Philadelphia prosecutors around the time of Mumia's 1982 trial. This was addressed by Swarns, who presented oral arguments contained in an amicus brief on behalf of Abu-Jamal by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
The LDEF pioneered the affirmative use of civil actions to end jury discrimination. Their 31-page brief, which underscores the seriousness of the evidence of racial discrimination, can be found at www.naacpldf.org/content/pdf/jury/Abu-Jamal_v_Horn_amicus_brief.pdf.
The LDEF brief cites the 1986 case of Batson v. Kentucky, in which the Supreme Court declared that a criminal defendant who is able to prove that his trial prosecutor used peremptory challenges to exclude potential jurors on the basis of race is entitled to a new trial. Attorneys on behalf of Abu-Jamal are asking the Third Circuit Court of Appeals to consider the combination of factors that infer that his was unquestionably a racially charged case.
Case tainted with racism
Abu-Jamal is African-American and the victim was a white policeman. In the months between the Dec. 9, 1981, shooting death of Daniel Faulkner and the July 1982 trial, the local media continually emphasized the racial aspects of the case, particularly Abu-Jamal's membership in the Black Panther Party and his support of the MOVE organization, including the political prisoners known as the MOVE 9.
In his work as a journalist, Abu-Jamal often reported on prisons and police brutality and in one instance publicly challenged then Police Commissioner Frank Rizzo. He also wore his hair in dreadlocks at the time and the LDEF brief cites a Philadelphia Inquirer article from June 10, 1982, which stated, "Several prospective jurors left the courtroom Tuesday saying they were too upset and afraid to serve after being questioned by Abu-Jamal, who wears his hair in the dreadlocks style of the MOVE sect."
Swarns argued that the trial prosecutor in Abu-Jamal's case, Joseph McGill, had a history of systematically striking Black jurors. The LDEF brief notes that "a survey of homicide cases tried by Mr. McGill between September of 1981 and October 1983 reveal that he excluded prospective African-American venire persons approximately three times as often as he excluded non-black prospective jurors."
The brief points out that "A comprehensive statistical study of Philadelphia County death penalty cases tried between 1981 and 1997 reveals that, `in 317 capital trials in Philadelphia between 1981 and 1997, prosecutors struck 51 percent of black jurors and 26 percent of non black jurors.'" Both Swarns and Bryan made reference to a notorious video training tape prepared by Philadelphia D.A. Jack McMahon advocating the systematic exclusion of African-American prospective jurors based on his experience in the D.A.'s office.
Swarns also noted that African-American jurors were struck from the jury pool because they were unemployed, divorced or single parents, yet these criteria were not applied to white jurors. Black jurors were asked if they had heard Abu-Jamal on Black radio stations, yet white jurors were not asked if they had heard Abu-Jamal's commentaries that played on NPR. One African-American man was dismissed because he admitted to having a hearing problem, while a white juror who had to turn up his hearing aid to listen to Prosecutor McGill's questions was allowed to remain.
One African-American woman whom McGill picked for the jury because "she hated Abu-Jamal" was later thrown off by Sabo when she had to attend to a dying pet. She'd asked for a brief time off but was refused. Meanwhile Sabo adjourned the proceedings for an entire afternoon so that a white, male juror could take a civil service exam.
The issue of McGill's clearly inappropriate instructions to jurors during the July 1982 sentencing phase was addressed by Ritter who also questioned the legality of McGill's three-page verdict form.
Each death sentence must rest on two findings: proof beyond a reasonable doubt of at least one aggravating circumstance that would have increased the seriousness of the crime; and the finding that there are no mitigating circumstances sufficiently substantial to call for leniency in sentencing. The verdict form in Abu-Jamal's case consisted of a list of aggravators without any instructions on their application.
While the law doesn't require jurors to be unanimous when it comes to considering mitigating circumstances (for example, positive character witnesses or the fact that the defendant in this case had never been convicted of a crime), the verdict form provided no space for jurors to indicate that some jurors felt these were relevant even if not all agreed upon them.
In fact McGill's instructions gave jurors the impression that they had to be unanimous in order for mitigating circumstances to be considered. In addition, Ritter challenged the constitutionality of McGill's charge to the jury that it was alright if they gave Abu-Jamal the death sentence because he would have "appeal after appeal."
A third appeal by Abu-Jamal's attorneys argued that his 1995 PCRA hearing was constitutionally flawed because the judge—the same Judge Albert Sabo who tried Mumia's original case—was biased in favor of the prosecution. The PCRA transcript shows that Sabo denied subpoenas of witnesses requested by the defense, cut off defense lines of questioning and threatened Abu-Jamal's attorneys with contempt of court when they challenged him. One defense witness who testified to being coerced by prosecutors to lie in the 1982 trial, found herself arrested in the courtroom while she was still on the witness stand in the PCRA hearing.
Sabo's racism and bias against Abu-Jamal is also evidenced by his comment to another judge, "I'm going to help them fry the n****r," overheard by court stenographer Terri Maurer Carter.
`The Mumia rule'
While many of the cases cited as legal precedent by Abu-Jamal's attorneys have been grounds for the reversal of a number of convictions in capital cases, that is no guarantee of a new trial for Abu-Jamal. In a May 15, article by author Dave Lindorff and columnist Linn Washington Jr. titled "Justice System on Trial as Mumia Case Reaches Climax," they point out that over the course of Abu-Jamal's more than two-decade-long appeals process, the courts have shown a willingness to create special exceptions that apply only to him.
They note an example of what might be called `The Mumia Rule' that occurred in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The state's top judges in 1986 overturned a death sentence where McGill had made the same closing arguments to jurors at the conclusion of a murder trial presided over by none other than Sabo.
The state's top court declared that McGill's language had "minimized the jury's sense of responsibility for a verdict of death" and ordered a new trial. Three years later in 1989, this court reversed itself when it came to upholding Abu-Jamal's conviction. Eleven years later in 1997 the court flip-flopped again and barred such language by all prosecutors "in all future trials."
In his closing arguments during the May 17th hearing, defense attorney Robert Bryan made a point of this when he listed defendants whose capital cases have come before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals—Donald Hardcastle, Arnold Holloway, Curtis Brinson and Harold Wilson—whose convictions were overturned because of racial discrimination in the proceedings. "Are we to believe that there was no racism in this highly charged case in which a political Black defendant was accused of killing a white police officer; that his is the exception to the rule?" Bryan charged.
The three white, male judges appeared to take a cavalier view when discussing the "criteria" by which they would decide whether racism was a factor in this case. An example of this was their debate over what percentage of exclusion of African Americans from a jury would constitute "bias." At one point Judge Ambro even acknowledged that the intentional exclusion of even one juror on the basis of race violates Abu-Jamal's constitutional rights.
John Parker, a Mumia supporter who flew in from Los Angeles, told Workers World that "While some have applauded the judges for their `fair attitude' at the hearing, in the first place it's ridiculous that there had to be a hearing since there is more than ample proof that Mumia did not have a fair trial. The judges read the arguments before the trial started. They should have granted a new trial automatically. In the second place, if these judges were really concerned about fairness, truth and decency, they would see more of a sense of urgency in getting Mumia free, not waiting a month or so to make a decision while Mumia remains tortured under the conditions he's placed in on death row."
The judges are expected to return a ruling within the next 45 to 90 days.
Before, during and after the two-hour-plus legal proceedings, demonstrators took to the streets, including marching up Market Street and several times around City Hall, blocking traffic for nearly 30 minutes. The march was led by a sound truck packed with youthful supporters. Along the way, shoppers, motorists and workers on their lunch hour stopped to receive material on the case, ask questions and often express their support by honking their horns and waving their fists in the air.
Widespread support was also evident at three separate events the night before, including a reception at the Friends Center for Cynthia McKinney and the French delegation, a teach-in at Drexel University sponsored by Educators for Mumia, and a jam-packed hip-hop and spoken word performance at the Rotunda featuring Immortal Technique.
This community support is a critical factor in winning freedom for Mumia Abu-Jamal. For all the legal dancing around how the federal courts should weigh the claims raised by the attorneys, many suspect that this case will not be determined on the basis of law, but on the basis of the political movement mobilizing in the streets.
Speaking at the teach-in the night before the appellate hearing and at a public forum the following evening, German author and researcher Michael Schiffman provided stark evidence that a lot of people have lied in order to put Abu-Jamal on Pennsylvania's death row and to keep him there. Schiffman presented a slide show of photos taken by press photographer Pedro Polakoff that exposes police manipulation of the 1981 crime scene and contradicts statements made by key witnesses for the prosecution and is further evidence of prosecutorial misconduct. Schiffman noted, "To bring this to light would put many careers on the line—some in very high places."
Already an on-line petition is being circulated calling on the Third Circuit Court judges to do the right thing and rule in favor of a new trial, but organizing has to be done to raise broader awareness of the facts in the case and to prepare Abu-Jamal's supporters for what comes next. Toward this end, the Philadelphia International Action Center has issued a call for a meeting on May 29 at 7 p.m. at the Calvary Church, 48th and Baltimore in Philadelphia. Call 215-724-1618.
Piette was an eyewitness to the May 17 oral argument.
Articles copyright 1995-2007 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
POCC report back on Mumia's Philly hearing
by Minister of Information JR
Wednesday, 23 May 2007
This crew of MOVE children was tellin' the people why we need to continue supporting political prisoners like Mumia Abu Jamal, the MOVE 9 and others. This photo was taken on May 17 outside of the Philly courtroom where political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal's fate was being argued by his defense attorneys and the state's attorneys. The MOVE family have been continuously terrorized by the Philly holice over the years, including in 1985 when a bomb was dropped on their house and a total of over 60 homes burned to the ground, killing women, children and animals. Journalist Mumia Abu Jamal covered a number of stories dealing wit' the MOVE 1978 confrontation wit' the holice where many of the MOVE 9 were beat and stomped, and one holice died from "friendly fire." And although that was a well known fact, the MOVE 9 have been locked up every since on this trumped up murder. Free 'Em All!
Oral arguments were heard in the case of political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal on May 17 in a Philadelphia courtroom filled to its 250-person capacity. In the hot sun outside the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, hundreds of people rallied, awaiting news about what was going on behind the judicial closed doors.
Well known people like former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney were walking around doing interviews, Chairman Fred Hampton Jr. was helping Pam Africa and her crew to keep the rallying crowd organized, while a group of about seven MOVE children under the age of 10 were proclaiming through the mic the reason why we were here.
Inside the courtroom, American Indian Movement member and author Ward Churchill and former Black Panther turned lawyer Kathleen Cleaver were among the many supporters of Mumia Abu Jamal who witnessed the oral arguments. The stars of this show were Mumia's two female attorneys, one from the NAACP, whom many inside the courtroom said was razor sharp when it was time to make what could be the last presentation to save the life and free this political prisoner, who has been languishing in a concentration camp for the last two and a half decades on trumped up charges of murdering a police officer.
Political rapper Immortal Technique was the headliner at the "Free Mumia" concert in Philly last week. He has been a continuous supporter of political prisoners across the country.
After the hearing, when the lead attorney, Robert Bryan, came out of the courtroom, he was swarmed by reporters and supporters who were thirsty for news about what went down. He talked for about 15 minutes, discussing the constitutional and human rights violations that occurred during Mumia's trial, including a huge number of Black potential jurors illegally eliminated from the jury pool by the prosecution before the trial started. After he said what he had to say and left, many of the people who were in the courtroom talked about how the three judges hearing the appeal seemed to side with Mumia after scrutinizing the prosecution's case.
Soon after Robert Bryan's presentation to the supporters and the media, the people marched about two and a half miles through the Philadelphia streets to City Hall, wit' hundreds of people of all ages and nationalities led by a flatbed truck, which was the moving stage. One of Mumia's daughters, the rapper Goldie-Locks, spoke and rhymed about the case and the reasons why we should continue to support Mumia and other political prisoners, while her sister kicked back and physically assisted her.
A number of young people who work with the International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu Jamal led chants between the different speakers. One of the more notable ones was a sista from South Africa, who did spirited "Free Mumia" chants accompanied by what I call the "Soweto Stomp," which was the stomp that accompanied many South African chants in their struggle against apartheid.
Reaching our destination, we marched along the street where City Hall is on one side and a construction site on the other. As the crowd passed the construction site, the mostly white construction workers starting throwing rocks and bricks at the people and putting up signs that said "Kill Mumia."
Mumia rally Philly Mumia's daughter GoldieLocks 051707 by JR.jpg CAPTION #3: Goldilocks, daughter of political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal, was on the back of a flat-bed truck stage talkin' and rappin' about her father's case during a march through the streets of Philly from the courthouse to City Hall on May 17 after oral arguments in Mumia's case.
Pam Africa, the uncompromising chairwoman of the International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu Jamal, got on the mic and told the people that "we're not no muthafucking pacifists" among other things and told the holice who were escorting the march that they better get involved or the people will address these construction workers in whatever fashion that we see suitable. After a few minutes, the whole construction site of about 100 workers was shut down as we continued our rally. Chairman Fred Hampton Jr. was the next speaker and the crowd cheered as he said, "We're shuttin' down construction sites today, and systems tomorrow."
As the rally settled on the steps of City Hall, former political prisoner Ramona Africa, who survived the MOVE house bombing in `85, told the crowd not to get lax because of what happened in court, because many times the judges act like they are on our side, but when the judgment comes down, their rulings support the prosecution.
As the day came to an end, many of the organizers traded notes on what we were going to do in the next 45-90 days, which is the time allotted for the three judges to come wit' a decision. I definitely want to give a People's Salute to all of the people who came out there to souljah on behalf of political prisoner and revolutionary journalist Mumia Abu Jamal. Stay tuned to the Bay View for more updates.
Email POCC Minister of Information JR at blockreportradio@gmail.com. This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it , and listen to the Block Report at hiphopwarreport.com or myspace.com/blockreportfilm.
Wednesday, 23 May 2007
This crew of MOVE children was tellin' the people why we need to continue supporting political prisoners like Mumia Abu Jamal, the MOVE 9 and others. This photo was taken on May 17 outside of the Philly courtroom where political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal's fate was being argued by his defense attorneys and the state's attorneys. The MOVE family have been continuously terrorized by the Philly holice over the years, including in 1985 when a bomb was dropped on their house and a total of over 60 homes burned to the ground, killing women, children and animals. Journalist Mumia Abu Jamal covered a number of stories dealing wit' the MOVE 1978 confrontation wit' the holice where many of the MOVE 9 were beat and stomped, and one holice died from "friendly fire." And although that was a well known fact, the MOVE 9 have been locked up every since on this trumped up murder. Free 'Em All!
Oral arguments were heard in the case of political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal on May 17 in a Philadelphia courtroom filled to its 250-person capacity. In the hot sun outside the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, hundreds of people rallied, awaiting news about what was going on behind the judicial closed doors.
Well known people like former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney were walking around doing interviews, Chairman Fred Hampton Jr. was helping Pam Africa and her crew to keep the rallying crowd organized, while a group of about seven MOVE children under the age of 10 were proclaiming through the mic the reason why we were here.
Inside the courtroom, American Indian Movement member and author Ward Churchill and former Black Panther turned lawyer Kathleen Cleaver were among the many supporters of Mumia Abu Jamal who witnessed the oral arguments. The stars of this show were Mumia's two female attorneys, one from the NAACP, whom many inside the courtroom said was razor sharp when it was time to make what could be the last presentation to save the life and free this political prisoner, who has been languishing in a concentration camp for the last two and a half decades on trumped up charges of murdering a police officer.
Political rapper Immortal Technique was the headliner at the "Free Mumia" concert in Philly last week. He has been a continuous supporter of political prisoners across the country.
After the hearing, when the lead attorney, Robert Bryan, came out of the courtroom, he was swarmed by reporters and supporters who were thirsty for news about what went down. He talked for about 15 minutes, discussing the constitutional and human rights violations that occurred during Mumia's trial, including a huge number of Black potential jurors illegally eliminated from the jury pool by the prosecution before the trial started. After he said what he had to say and left, many of the people who were in the courtroom talked about how the three judges hearing the appeal seemed to side with Mumia after scrutinizing the prosecution's case.
Soon after Robert Bryan's presentation to the supporters and the media, the people marched about two and a half miles through the Philadelphia streets to City Hall, wit' hundreds of people of all ages and nationalities led by a flatbed truck, which was the moving stage. One of Mumia's daughters, the rapper Goldie-Locks, spoke and rhymed about the case and the reasons why we should continue to support Mumia and other political prisoners, while her sister kicked back and physically assisted her.
A number of young people who work with the International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu Jamal led chants between the different speakers. One of the more notable ones was a sista from South Africa, who did spirited "Free Mumia" chants accompanied by what I call the "Soweto Stomp," which was the stomp that accompanied many South African chants in their struggle against apartheid.
Reaching our destination, we marched along the street where City Hall is on one side and a construction site on the other. As the crowd passed the construction site, the mostly white construction workers starting throwing rocks and bricks at the people and putting up signs that said "Kill Mumia."
Mumia rally Philly Mumia's daughter GoldieLocks 051707 by JR.jpg CAPTION #3: Goldilocks, daughter of political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal, was on the back of a flat-bed truck stage talkin' and rappin' about her father's case during a march through the streets of Philly from the courthouse to City Hall on May 17 after oral arguments in Mumia's case.
Pam Africa, the uncompromising chairwoman of the International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu Jamal, got on the mic and told the people that "we're not no muthafucking pacifists" among other things and told the holice who were escorting the march that they better get involved or the people will address these construction workers in whatever fashion that we see suitable. After a few minutes, the whole construction site of about 100 workers was shut down as we continued our rally. Chairman Fred Hampton Jr. was the next speaker and the crowd cheered as he said, "We're shuttin' down construction sites today, and systems tomorrow."
As the rally settled on the steps of City Hall, former political prisoner Ramona Africa, who survived the MOVE house bombing in `85, told the crowd not to get lax because of what happened in court, because many times the judges act like they are on our side, but when the judgment comes down, their rulings support the prosecution.
As the day came to an end, many of the organizers traded notes on what we were going to do in the next 45-90 days, which is the time allotted for the three judges to come wit' a decision. I definitely want to give a People's Salute to all of the people who came out there to souljah on behalf of political prisoner and revolutionary journalist Mumia Abu Jamal. Stay tuned to the Bay View for more updates.
Email POCC Minister of Information JR at blockreportradio@gmail.com. This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it , and listen to the Block Report at hiphopwarreport.com or myspace.com/blockreportfilm.
IPS Article: Retrial Possible for Mumia
DEATH PENALTY-US: Retrial Possible for Most Famous Black Inmate
Adrianne Appel
BOSTON, May 28 (IPS) - The talents and skills of leading U.S. lawyers, pathologists, scientists and independent criminal investigators are likely to be marshalled to save the life of Mumia Abu-Jamal if he is granted a new trial -- and also to highlight the role skin colour may play in U.S. death penalty convictions.
After nearly two decades of appeals, on May 17 a U.S. federal court of appeals took its first step towards possibly ordering a new trial for Abu-Jamal, one of the best-known among the country's 3,500 death row inmates. The decision of the panel of judges is expected to take several months in what has become one of the most controversial death penalty cases of all times.
Robert Bryan, the lawyer leading the battle for Abu-Jamal's life over the past four years, believes his client's case is very strong and that the appeal judges may order a new trial. Now for the first time since Abu-Jamal's conviction in 1982, the U.S. justice system is seriously considering whether racial discrimination and political bias interfered with Abu-Jamal's right to a fair trial.
"My goal is for him to go home to his family. That is the best of outcomes," Bryan told IPS.
Abu-Jamal, an outspoken political activist as a young man and still today from prison, was convicted by a nearly all-white jury in Philadelphia of the murder of policeman Daniel Faulkner. Faulkner was killed after he stopped a car driven by Abu-Jamal's brother in December 1981. Abu-Jamal was said to have run from his taxi to the scene and was arrested.
The facts of the crime are disputed. Eyewitness accounts are contradictory. Evidence is incomplete and has gone missing. Abu-Jamal was wounded in the chest by a bullet. Abu-Jamal has always maintained his innocence.
"The thread that runs through this case from the day Mumia was arrested until today is racism. At the original trial, the jury only heard one side of the coin. It was a comedy of errors. This case has never been properly investigated," Bryan said.
At the appeals hearing, Bryan and others argued that Abu-Jamal's original trial was unfair because blacks were intentionally excluded from the jury, a violation of the U.S. Constitution. The final jury consisted of 10 whites and two blacks. The population of Philadelphia at the time was 40 percent African American.
"What matters is that African American citizens were denied their right to participate in this important civic right and duty on the basis of race," Christina Swarns, a lawyer with the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People Legal Defence Fund, told IPS. "The questions of fairness have been there since the time the jury was chosen. Had the Pennsylvanian courts followed the law, this hearing would have been held many, many years ago -- and should have been."
There were other problems with the 1982 trial, Bryan said. The prosecutor misled the jury into believing that if they agreed to send Abu-Jamal to death row, the chance of him actually being executed was low. And the judge who presided over the trial, Albert Sabo, aimed a racial slur at the young journalist during a recess in the trial, Bryan said.
Sabo also had a conflict of interest and should never have presided over the trial, Jill Soffiyah Elijah, a member of the National Lawyer's Guild, told IPS. He was an active member of the Fraternal Order of Police, a powerful group that represents the interests of police and lobbies for the death penalty in cases where police officers have been murdered.
"They have lobbied heavily for Mr. Abu-Jamal's execution," said Elijah, also a professor at Harvard University. "Judge Sabo's involvement indicated a conflict of interest and compromised his ability to be objective."
According to reports elsewhere, Sabo, who died in 2002, was nicknamed "the hanging judge". In a 14 year period, he presided over trials in which 31 defendants were sentenced to death, more than any other U.S. judge. Twenty-nine of these came from ethnic minorities.
While Abu-Jamal's lawyers used the appeals court hearing to push for a new trial, prosecutors urged the judges to re-affirm his death row conviction. Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell has stated publicly that if the judges did this, he would order Abu-Jamal's execution.
Rendell has a long-standing interest in Abu-Jamal's case. He was Philadelphia district chief prosecutor in 1982, and it was his office and his employees who prosecuted Abu-Jamal.
In the past the district prosecutor's office had been involved in a pattern of discrimination in many cases, Bryan said. This included presenting false evidence and getting witnesses to lie. He was optimistic that the federal appeal judges would acknowledge this and allow Abu-Jamal a new trial.
"My goal is to win this case," Bryan said. "We have a lot of new evidence. If we can get a trial, it will be presented to the new jury. A lot of new pathology, DNA and ballistics will be done. I have faith that 12 men and women of the jury will let my client go home."
But Bryan would want to move the case out of Philadelphia. "There is so much corruption and unfairness in the Philadelphia court system, it's hard to imagine getting a fair trial," Bryan said.
Abu-Jamal, now 53, has won thousands of supporters around the world. "When they put him on death row, they thought they would shut him down," Bryan said. "Instead, Mumia has become an international symbol against the death penalty."
His supporters include Hollywood celebrities, politicians and university students. In St. Denis, France, a street is named after him.
At the appeals hearing, about 200 people packed the courtroom. Outside about 500 people demonstrated on Abu-Jamal's behalf. Supporters came from France, Germany and elsewhere. (END/2007)
Adrianne Appel
BOSTON, May 28 (IPS) - The talents and skills of leading U.S. lawyers, pathologists, scientists and independent criminal investigators are likely to be marshalled to save the life of Mumia Abu-Jamal if he is granted a new trial -- and also to highlight the role skin colour may play in U.S. death penalty convictions.
After nearly two decades of appeals, on May 17 a U.S. federal court of appeals took its first step towards possibly ordering a new trial for Abu-Jamal, one of the best-known among the country's 3,500 death row inmates. The decision of the panel of judges is expected to take several months in what has become one of the most controversial death penalty cases of all times.
Robert Bryan, the lawyer leading the battle for Abu-Jamal's life over the past four years, believes his client's case is very strong and that the appeal judges may order a new trial. Now for the first time since Abu-Jamal's conviction in 1982, the U.S. justice system is seriously considering whether racial discrimination and political bias interfered with Abu-Jamal's right to a fair trial.
"My goal is for him to go home to his family. That is the best of outcomes," Bryan told IPS.
Abu-Jamal, an outspoken political activist as a young man and still today from prison, was convicted by a nearly all-white jury in Philadelphia of the murder of policeman Daniel Faulkner. Faulkner was killed after he stopped a car driven by Abu-Jamal's brother in December 1981. Abu-Jamal was said to have run from his taxi to the scene and was arrested.
The facts of the crime are disputed. Eyewitness accounts are contradictory. Evidence is incomplete and has gone missing. Abu-Jamal was wounded in the chest by a bullet. Abu-Jamal has always maintained his innocence.
"The thread that runs through this case from the day Mumia was arrested until today is racism. At the original trial, the jury only heard one side of the coin. It was a comedy of errors. This case has never been properly investigated," Bryan said.
At the appeals hearing, Bryan and others argued that Abu-Jamal's original trial was unfair because blacks were intentionally excluded from the jury, a violation of the U.S. Constitution. The final jury consisted of 10 whites and two blacks. The population of Philadelphia at the time was 40 percent African American.
"What matters is that African American citizens were denied their right to participate in this important civic right and duty on the basis of race," Christina Swarns, a lawyer with the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People Legal Defence Fund, told IPS. "The questions of fairness have been there since the time the jury was chosen. Had the Pennsylvanian courts followed the law, this hearing would have been held many, many years ago -- and should have been."
There were other problems with the 1982 trial, Bryan said. The prosecutor misled the jury into believing that if they agreed to send Abu-Jamal to death row, the chance of him actually being executed was low. And the judge who presided over the trial, Albert Sabo, aimed a racial slur at the young journalist during a recess in the trial, Bryan said.
Sabo also had a conflict of interest and should never have presided over the trial, Jill Soffiyah Elijah, a member of the National Lawyer's Guild, told IPS. He was an active member of the Fraternal Order of Police, a powerful group that represents the interests of police and lobbies for the death penalty in cases where police officers have been murdered.
"They have lobbied heavily for Mr. Abu-Jamal's execution," said Elijah, also a professor at Harvard University. "Judge Sabo's involvement indicated a conflict of interest and compromised his ability to be objective."
According to reports elsewhere, Sabo, who died in 2002, was nicknamed "the hanging judge". In a 14 year period, he presided over trials in which 31 defendants were sentenced to death, more than any other U.S. judge. Twenty-nine of these came from ethnic minorities.
While Abu-Jamal's lawyers used the appeals court hearing to push for a new trial, prosecutors urged the judges to re-affirm his death row conviction. Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell has stated publicly that if the judges did this, he would order Abu-Jamal's execution.
Rendell has a long-standing interest in Abu-Jamal's case. He was Philadelphia district chief prosecutor in 1982, and it was his office and his employees who prosecuted Abu-Jamal.
In the past the district prosecutor's office had been involved in a pattern of discrimination in many cases, Bryan said. This included presenting false evidence and getting witnesses to lie. He was optimistic that the federal appeal judges would acknowledge this and allow Abu-Jamal a new trial.
"My goal is to win this case," Bryan said. "We have a lot of new evidence. If we can get a trial, it will be presented to the new jury. A lot of new pathology, DNA and ballistics will be done. I have faith that 12 men and women of the jury will let my client go home."
But Bryan would want to move the case out of Philadelphia. "There is so much corruption and unfairness in the Philadelphia court system, it's hard to imagine getting a fair trial," Bryan said.
Abu-Jamal, now 53, has won thousands of supporters around the world. "When they put him on death row, they thought they would shut him down," Bryan said. "Instead, Mumia has become an international symbol against the death penalty."
His supporters include Hollywood celebrities, politicians and university students. In St. Denis, France, a street is named after him.
At the appeals hearing, about 200 people packed the courtroom. Outside about 500 people demonstrated on Abu-Jamal's behalf. Supporters came from France, Germany and elsewhere. (END/2007)
Get Involved in the Harlem Campaign to Name a Street in Honor of Mumia Abu-Jamal
6pm, FRIDAY, JUNE 15
ST. MARY'S CHURCH
521 West 126th Street
(Bet. Broadway and Amsterdam)
FREE ADMISSION!
Refreshments will be available
Topics will include:
Update on where Mumia's case stands in the courts and the streets, The murder of Sean Bell and the criminalization of our youth, Police Terror and repression, fighting back, waging the street naming campaign, AND MORE!
Mumia Abu-Jamal, an activist by the time he was 14 years old, was beaten by cops and arrested for protesting the rabid racist George Wallace when Wallace was campaigning for the presidency in the 60's. By the time Mumia was 15 the FBI had developed a file on him. Mumia became the Minister of Information for the Philadelphia chapter of the Black Panther Party when he was 16 years old. In his 20's as a journalist, Mumia reported on the Black radical MOVE organization, who Philadelphia politicians and police hated with passion. At the first chance they had, they framed him for killing a cop and sentenced him to death in a racist, kangaroo court. Today with the murder of Sean Bell, and widespread criminalization of innocent youth, we see that you don't even have to be politically active to draw police attack and repression. Come on June 15th to support Mumia at this critical stage of his case where the courts can grant: execution, life in prison without parole, or a new trial! Learn about how his case is connected to the oppression of our communities right here in Harlem.
Speakers include:
City Councilman Charles Barron, Pam Africa, Igwe Williams of the Guillermo Morales-Assata Shakur Center of City College, Attorney Michael Tarif Warren, Harold Wilsom (122nd exonerated death-row resident), Jasbir Finpho of the Jamaica NAACP Youth Council, Sandra Rivers, Harlem Activist, and others!
There will also be a brief video of the street naming activities in the French cities of Saint-Denis and Marseille.
Download the flyer at: http://www.freemumia.com/pdfs/june15pdf.pdf
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Verdict Nullification? Like it or not, Mumia may get a new trial.
by Dave Lindorff
Published: May 23, 2007
When the name Mumia Abu-Jamal comes up in local conversation, the debate immediately begins over whether he is guilty of a murder that has kept him on Pennsylvania's death row for 25 years. Rarely does it address the underlying question of whether he had a fair trial or appeal process.
Now, three 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges are mulling key elements that pertain to that very crucial question. They are also considering whether to uphold a 2001 decision by Federal District Judge William Yohn that overturned Abu-Jamal's death sentence for the Dec. 9, 1981, murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner.
The key claim argued before the three-judge panel during a two-and-a-half-hour hearing last Thursday (May 17) in the packed Ceremonial Courtroom of the federal courthouse was whether the prosecutor at the 1982 trial, Joseph McGill, improperly removed potential qualified jurors because of race.
In 1995, the District Attorney's office admitted that McGill used 10 of 15 peremptory challenges requests to strike jurors from consideration, for which no reason has to be given to remove black jurors who otherwise met the requirements to be on the panel, including a willingness to vote for death. This means that, of 14 possible qualified African-American jurors, McGill eliminated 10. That compares to only five white jurors that he peremptorily dismissed out of a possible 25. And it left Abu-Jamal's jury with nine whites and three blacks in a city that was 44 percent black (the gap widened when a black juror was removed by the judge and replaced by a white alternate, with the enthusiastic endorsement of McGill).
On its face, that would seem to be prima facie evidence of racial discrimination that would normally warrant a hearing, but there is more: Over the course of six murder trials that he tried, McGill used his peremptory challenges to remove 74 percent of qualified black jurors, compared to only 25 percent of white jurors. Moreover, McGill's methods were part of a pattern prevailing during the two terms of McGill's boss, then D.A. Ed Rendell. Under Rendell, prosecutors barred 58 percent of all blacks via peremptory challenges, compared to just 22 percent of whites.
Abu-Jamal's lead attorney, Robert R. Bryan, cited these statistics and noted that during jury questioning, McGill asked different questions of blacks than whites, and used different standards in deciding whom to remove.
Rather than contest the statistics and other evidence of racial discrimination in jury selection, Hugh Burns the head of the DA's appeals unit, he argued the state's case against Abu-Jamal claimed that Abu-Jamal had no right to raise the issue in federal court. Burns alleged that Abu-Jamal had missed his chance to do so in 1995, during his Post-Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) hearing, or subsequent appeal to the state supreme court.
The problem with the DA's argument? Much evidence of race-based jury selection did not come to light until 1998, a year after Abu-Jamal's final appeal had been decided. Since Abu-Jamal couldn't have had that evidence until his state appeal was over, it was first presented in his federal habeas appeal in 1999.
A second line of appeal by Abu-Jamal, briefly discussed at last week's hearing, was a statement made by McGill during his summation on the last day of the trial; he told jurors that if they had doubts about the defendant's guilt, they needn't worry, because, "If you find the defendant guilty of course there would be appeal after appeal and perhaps there could be a reversal of the case, or whatever, so that may not be final." (Juries are supposed to reach a guilty verdict only if the case was proven "beyond a reasonable doubt.") This was no slip by McGill, who used identical language in another case, which is why the state Supreme Court, in 1986, overturned that defendant's death sentence.
Now, Abu-Jamal is asking the appeals court to overturn his conviction on the same grounds. He seemed to have won some support from at least one judge, Robert Cowen.
When prosecutor Burns argued that McGill's statement could justify only overturning a sentence, not conviction, Cowen asked, "But isn't what the prosecutor said a denial of [the defendant's] right to a fair trial?"
There were many problems with Abu-Jamal's trial, his lawyers and supporters maintain. He was provided with almost no funds for ballistics or forensic experts. Records of interrogations show that prosecution witnesses were pressured by police over the course of six months to alter their testimony to comport with the prosecution's crime scenario. For example, white taxi driver Robert Chobert, who originally told police the shooter had fled the scene, later graphically described seeing Abu-Jamal do the shooting, execution-style. Chobert was uniquely vulnerable to pressure from prosecutors he had been driving on a license that had been suspended for a DWI conviction, and was also on five-years' probation for felony arson in the fire-bombing of an elementary school for money. Neither this information nor the fact that he had asked the DA to help him "fix" his license was allowed to go to the jury.
The point is that when people develop opinions about this controversial case, particularly in Philadelphia, they tend to base them on the fact of Abu-Jamal's conviction, and then, working on the assumption that the jury accepted the facts as presented at trial to be true, go on to proclaim him guilty of Faulkner's murder.
What if the conviction itself, however, was the result of a pre-selection of jurors inclined to believe the prosecutor, think Judge Albert Sabo was fair and believe police officers and prosecution witnesses? And if, moreover, those jurors were allowed to be assured by the prosecutor that the standard for conviction needn't be "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," then what certainty is there about any of the "facts" presented at the trial, or about the verdict?
This is why the appeal now being considered by the three judges of the 3rd Circuit Chief Judge Anthony Scirica, Judge Cowen and Judge Thomas Ambro is critical. If justice and the hallowed constitutional right to a fair trial are to have any real meaning in the United States, it is essential that juries be chosen in a manner that is fair, not stacked, and it is essential that if the resulting jury convicts especially in a capital case it be on the basis of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt."
As the arguments presented at the 3rd Circuit hearing made clear, there are solid reasons to doubt that either of those things happened in Abu-Jamal's case. Philadelphians need to be prepared to accept that if at least two judges on the appeals court panel reach that conclusion, there will be no way to convincingly argue that Abu-Jamal "did it," until the evidence is presented fairly at a new trial.
(editorial@citypaper.net)
Dave Lindorff, a Philadelphia-area investigative journalist and columnist, is author of Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal (Common Courage Press, 2004).
Published: May 23, 2007
When the name Mumia Abu-Jamal comes up in local conversation, the debate immediately begins over whether he is guilty of a murder that has kept him on Pennsylvania's death row for 25 years. Rarely does it address the underlying question of whether he had a fair trial or appeal process.
Now, three 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges are mulling key elements that pertain to that very crucial question. They are also considering whether to uphold a 2001 decision by Federal District Judge William Yohn that overturned Abu-Jamal's death sentence for the Dec. 9, 1981, murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner.
The key claim argued before the three-judge panel during a two-and-a-half-hour hearing last Thursday (May 17) in the packed Ceremonial Courtroom of the federal courthouse was whether the prosecutor at the 1982 trial, Joseph McGill, improperly removed potential qualified jurors because of race.
In 1995, the District Attorney's office admitted that McGill used 10 of 15 peremptory challenges requests to strike jurors from consideration, for which no reason has to be given to remove black jurors who otherwise met the requirements to be on the panel, including a willingness to vote for death. This means that, of 14 possible qualified African-American jurors, McGill eliminated 10. That compares to only five white jurors that he peremptorily dismissed out of a possible 25. And it left Abu-Jamal's jury with nine whites and three blacks in a city that was 44 percent black (the gap widened when a black juror was removed by the judge and replaced by a white alternate, with the enthusiastic endorsement of McGill).
On its face, that would seem to be prima facie evidence of racial discrimination that would normally warrant a hearing, but there is more: Over the course of six murder trials that he tried, McGill used his peremptory challenges to remove 74 percent of qualified black jurors, compared to only 25 percent of white jurors. Moreover, McGill's methods were part of a pattern prevailing during the two terms of McGill's boss, then D.A. Ed Rendell. Under Rendell, prosecutors barred 58 percent of all blacks via peremptory challenges, compared to just 22 percent of whites.
Abu-Jamal's lead attorney, Robert R. Bryan, cited these statistics and noted that during jury questioning, McGill asked different questions of blacks than whites, and used different standards in deciding whom to remove.
Rather than contest the statistics and other evidence of racial discrimination in jury selection, Hugh Burns the head of the DA's appeals unit, he argued the state's case against Abu-Jamal claimed that Abu-Jamal had no right to raise the issue in federal court. Burns alleged that Abu-Jamal had missed his chance to do so in 1995, during his Post-Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) hearing, or subsequent appeal to the state supreme court.
The problem with the DA's argument? Much evidence of race-based jury selection did not come to light until 1998, a year after Abu-Jamal's final appeal had been decided. Since Abu-Jamal couldn't have had that evidence until his state appeal was over, it was first presented in his federal habeas appeal in 1999.
A second line of appeal by Abu-Jamal, briefly discussed at last week's hearing, was a statement made by McGill during his summation on the last day of the trial; he told jurors that if they had doubts about the defendant's guilt, they needn't worry, because, "If you find the defendant guilty of course there would be appeal after appeal and perhaps there could be a reversal of the case, or whatever, so that may not be final." (Juries are supposed to reach a guilty verdict only if the case was proven "beyond a reasonable doubt.") This was no slip by McGill, who used identical language in another case, which is why the state Supreme Court, in 1986, overturned that defendant's death sentence.
Now, Abu-Jamal is asking the appeals court to overturn his conviction on the same grounds. He seemed to have won some support from at least one judge, Robert Cowen.
When prosecutor Burns argued that McGill's statement could justify only overturning a sentence, not conviction, Cowen asked, "But isn't what the prosecutor said a denial of [the defendant's] right to a fair trial?"
There were many problems with Abu-Jamal's trial, his lawyers and supporters maintain. He was provided with almost no funds for ballistics or forensic experts. Records of interrogations show that prosecution witnesses were pressured by police over the course of six months to alter their testimony to comport with the prosecution's crime scenario. For example, white taxi driver Robert Chobert, who originally told police the shooter had fled the scene, later graphically described seeing Abu-Jamal do the shooting, execution-style. Chobert was uniquely vulnerable to pressure from prosecutors he had been driving on a license that had been suspended for a DWI conviction, and was also on five-years' probation for felony arson in the fire-bombing of an elementary school for money. Neither this information nor the fact that he had asked the DA to help him "fix" his license was allowed to go to the jury.
The point is that when people develop opinions about this controversial case, particularly in Philadelphia, they tend to base them on the fact of Abu-Jamal's conviction, and then, working on the assumption that the jury accepted the facts as presented at trial to be true, go on to proclaim him guilty of Faulkner's murder.
What if the conviction itself, however, was the result of a pre-selection of jurors inclined to believe the prosecutor, think Judge Albert Sabo was fair and believe police officers and prosecution witnesses? And if, moreover, those jurors were allowed to be assured by the prosecutor that the standard for conviction needn't be "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," then what certainty is there about any of the "facts" presented at the trial, or about the verdict?
This is why the appeal now being considered by the three judges of the 3rd Circuit Chief Judge Anthony Scirica, Judge Cowen and Judge Thomas Ambro is critical. If justice and the hallowed constitutional right to a fair trial are to have any real meaning in the United States, it is essential that juries be chosen in a manner that is fair, not stacked, and it is essential that if the resulting jury convicts especially in a capital case it be on the basis of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt."
As the arguments presented at the 3rd Circuit hearing made clear, there are solid reasons to doubt that either of those things happened in Abu-Jamal's case. Philadelphians need to be prepared to accept that if at least two judges on the appeals court panel reach that conclusion, there will be no way to convincingly argue that Abu-Jamal "did it," until the evidence is presented fairly at a new trial.
(editorial@citypaper.net)
Dave Lindorff, a Philadelphia-area investigative journalist and columnist, is author of Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal (Common Courage Press, 2004).
Solidarity for Mumia in 6 U.S. cities, 8 countries
Published May 24, 2007 12:14 AM
In at least five U.S. cities outside Philadelphia and at least eight other countries demonstrations in solidarity with Mumia Abu-Jamal took place aimed at bringing attention to the latest court hearing May 17 and winning the political prisoner a new trial on the way toward freeing him.
In Ankara, Turkey’s capital and Istanbul, its biggest city, activists protested against the United States for imprisoning Mumia unfairly for 25 years. The group included academics, journalists, human rights activists and also correspondents of the daily Evrensel in front of the U.S. Embassy in Ankara and the Central Post office in Istanbul. They delivered a petition to the U.S. Embassy demanding a fair trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal.
The Cleveland Lucasville Five Defense Committee demonstrated during rush hour downtown. Signs called for the freedom of Abu-Jamal and the Lucasville Five, innocent men who face execution in Ohio in relation to the 1993 Lucasville prison uprising, and demanded “Justice for Aaron Steele.” Steele, a 23-year old African-American bus mechanic, died May 8 after being shot multiple times by Cleveland police. Passersby grabbed hundreds of newsletters on Mumia’s case. Other Mumia supporters had held a protest during the morning rush hour.
Members of the San Diego International Action Center and the San Diego Mumia Coalition gathered at a busy community intersection and distributed newsletters and other material on Mumia’s case to workers on their way home from work in the evening commute. Several motorists pulled over to get more details on Mumia’s struggle. Poet Jim Moreno read his Ode to Mumia for the assembled activists.
Organized in only one week, a broad-base of labor and community activists joined to support a May 17 press conference and protest in Milwaukee demanding a new trial for political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal.
Speakers from Africans on the Move, AFSCME Local 82, Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), International Action Center-Milwaukee, the National Lawyers Guild, Pan African Revolutionary Socialist Party, Peace Action-Wisconsin and the Wisconsin Green Party spoke in downtown Milwaukee at the Henry Reuss Federal Plaza.
Prior to the May 17 action IAC-Milwaukee organizer Bryan G. Pfeifer was invited to speak about the struggle surrounding Mumia Abu-Jamal’s case on “The Eric Von” show hosted by African American- radio journalist Eric Von and “The Word Warriors Report,” hosted by African- American City Councilman Michael McGee Jr.
In Houston, in the execution capital of the country, where 16 executions are scheduled over the summer, anti-death penalty activists were fired up by the strong turnouts at two demonstrations. Outside the criminal courthouse, notorious for sending Shaka Sankofa, Frances Newton and Joseph Nichols to the execution chambers, demonstrators faced down a phalanx of cops in riot gear, mounted police and undercover cops everywhere that outnumbered the protesters 10-1. “Maybe they thought Mumia was joining us,” said one of the organizers.
In the afternoon from 4-6 p.m. there was another militant demonstration and rally, this one showing unity among young and older and Black, Latin@, Asian and white protesters from the Nation of Islam, the National Black United Front, the New Black Panther Party--whose youth distributed almost 600 of the Mumia newspapers--the Anarchist Black Cross, Code Pink, World Can’t Wait, gay activist/leader Ray Hill, the Revolutionary Communist Party, Zapatista supporters who just returned from meeting Zapatistas with La Otra Campana across the border, the director of S.H.A.P.E. Center where the Movement to Abolish the Death Penalty is based, the leader of the Venezuela Solidarity Committee and others as every group took the microphone.
In San Francisco over 300 people rallied in front of the federal building to demand that Mumia Abu-Jamal be set free, in an action sponsored by the locally-based Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal. A broad coalition of students, union members, community activists and prisoner advocates spoke out, including Rudy Corpuz, Jr. and other members of United Playaz, who linked the fight to free Mumia with the everyday reality of repression and racism in the Black and Brown communities of the Bay Area.
Kiilu Nyasha, a local activist and former Black Panther Party member, delivered a solidarity statement to the crowd on behalf of the San Francisco 8 who are former BPP members and community activists who were arrested this spring and charged with the 1971 killing of a San Francisco policeman. Cristina Gutierrez of Barrio Unido called upon the crowd to unite to “change this system. His freedom is our freedom. His life is our life.” Judy Greenspan spoke at the rally representing Workers World Party. Other speakers demanded a new trial and freedom for Mumia.
Native political prisoner Leonard Peltier’s statement to Mumia was read from the podium in Milwaukee, Houston and other cities.
Cihan Celik in Istanbul, Susan Danann, Bob McCubbin, Bryan G. Pfeifer, Gloria Rubac and Judy Greenspan contributed to this article.
In at least five U.S. cities outside Philadelphia and at least eight other countries demonstrations in solidarity with Mumia Abu-Jamal took place aimed at bringing attention to the latest court hearing May 17 and winning the political prisoner a new trial on the way toward freeing him.
In Ankara, Turkey’s capital and Istanbul, its biggest city, activists protested against the United States for imprisoning Mumia unfairly for 25 years. The group included academics, journalists, human rights activists and also correspondents of the daily Evrensel in front of the U.S. Embassy in Ankara and the Central Post office in Istanbul. They delivered a petition to the U.S. Embassy demanding a fair trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal.
The Cleveland Lucasville Five Defense Committee demonstrated during rush hour downtown. Signs called for the freedom of Abu-Jamal and the Lucasville Five, innocent men who face execution in Ohio in relation to the 1993 Lucasville prison uprising, and demanded “Justice for Aaron Steele.” Steele, a 23-year old African-American bus mechanic, died May 8 after being shot multiple times by Cleveland police. Passersby grabbed hundreds of newsletters on Mumia’s case. Other Mumia supporters had held a protest during the morning rush hour.
Members of the San Diego International Action Center and the San Diego Mumia Coalition gathered at a busy community intersection and distributed newsletters and other material on Mumia’s case to workers on their way home from work in the evening commute. Several motorists pulled over to get more details on Mumia’s struggle. Poet Jim Moreno read his Ode to Mumia for the assembled activists.
Organized in only one week, a broad-base of labor and community activists joined to support a May 17 press conference and protest in Milwaukee demanding a new trial for political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal.
Speakers from Africans on the Move, AFSCME Local 82, Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), International Action Center-Milwaukee, the National Lawyers Guild, Pan African Revolutionary Socialist Party, Peace Action-Wisconsin and the Wisconsin Green Party spoke in downtown Milwaukee at the Henry Reuss Federal Plaza.
Prior to the May 17 action IAC-Milwaukee organizer Bryan G. Pfeifer was invited to speak about the struggle surrounding Mumia Abu-Jamal’s case on “The Eric Von” show hosted by African American- radio journalist Eric Von and “The Word Warriors Report,” hosted by African- American City Councilman Michael McGee Jr.
In Houston, in the execution capital of the country, where 16 executions are scheduled over the summer, anti-death penalty activists were fired up by the strong turnouts at two demonstrations. Outside the criminal courthouse, notorious for sending Shaka Sankofa, Frances Newton and Joseph Nichols to the execution chambers, demonstrators faced down a phalanx of cops in riot gear, mounted police and undercover cops everywhere that outnumbered the protesters 10-1. “Maybe they thought Mumia was joining us,” said one of the organizers.
In the afternoon from 4-6 p.m. there was another militant demonstration and rally, this one showing unity among young and older and Black, Latin@, Asian and white protesters from the Nation of Islam, the National Black United Front, the New Black Panther Party--whose youth distributed almost 600 of the Mumia newspapers--the Anarchist Black Cross, Code Pink, World Can’t Wait, gay activist/leader Ray Hill, the Revolutionary Communist Party, Zapatista supporters who just returned from meeting Zapatistas with La Otra Campana across the border, the director of S.H.A.P.E. Center where the Movement to Abolish the Death Penalty is based, the leader of the Venezuela Solidarity Committee and others as every group took the microphone.
In San Francisco over 300 people rallied in front of the federal building to demand that Mumia Abu-Jamal be set free, in an action sponsored by the locally-based Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal. A broad coalition of students, union members, community activists and prisoner advocates spoke out, including Rudy Corpuz, Jr. and other members of United Playaz, who linked the fight to free Mumia with the everyday reality of repression and racism in the Black and Brown communities of the Bay Area.
Kiilu Nyasha, a local activist and former Black Panther Party member, delivered a solidarity statement to the crowd on behalf of the San Francisco 8 who are former BPP members and community activists who were arrested this spring and charged with the 1971 killing of a San Francisco policeman. Cristina Gutierrez of Barrio Unido called upon the crowd to unite to “change this system. His freedom is our freedom. His life is our life.” Judy Greenspan spoke at the rally representing Workers World Party. Other speakers demanded a new trial and freedom for Mumia.
Native political prisoner Leonard Peltier’s statement to Mumia was read from the podium in Milwaukee, Houston and other cities.
Cihan Celik in Istanbul, Susan Danann, Bob McCubbin, Bryan G. Pfeifer, Gloria Rubac and Judy Greenspan contributed to this article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)