Save December 6th for an International Day of Solidarity with Mumia!
"I see no reason why we should not afford Abu-Jamal the courtesy of our precedents. Why we pick this case to depart from that reasoning I do not know."
- Judge Thomas Ambro
Once again the courts have ignored and changed precedents to illegally continue the imprisonment of Mumia Abu-Jamal. In July the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against three issues that could have led to a new trial. One of the three judges on the panel, Judge Thomas Ambro, dissented against one of the rulings pointint out that it ignores precedent.
Other than the US Supreme Court this was the last appeal to have his conviction overturned. Without an outpouring of public protest, Mumia will either be executed or will spend life in prison without the possibility of parole.
International Day of Action on December 6th!
(December 9th marks 27 years of unjust imprisonment).
Save the date! Mass action in Philly on December 6th!
There will be actions in cities internationlly. Email icffmaj@aol.com and join the list serv to find out how to become involved.
International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal
www.freemumia.com 215.476.8812 icffmaj@aol.com
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition, NYC
P.O. Box 16, College Station, New York, NY 10030
212.330.8029 info@freemumia.com
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Friday, September 05, 2008
Mumia Prepares new appeal
From InterPress Service:
RIGHTS-US: Death Row Activist Prepares New Appeal
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43773
By Adrianne Appel
BOSTON, Sep 3 (IPS) - Mumia Abu-Jamal rallied thousands of protesters in the U.S. city of Denver last week who were calling for the release of U.S. political prisoners.
In a recorded message for the crowds protesting outside the Democratic National Convention, journalist Abu-Jamal attacked U.S. foreign policy, the protection of "foreign despots" and war for "foreign pipelines".
Abu-Jamal made the recording from his death row prison cell at a time when his 26-year battle for freedom has reached a critical point.
He and his lawyer are preparing to take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court to ask it to rule on whether the lower courts have denied him justice because of racial bias.
The decision to go to the Supreme Court was taken after a federal appeals court in Philadelphia in July refused to reconsider an application for a new trial about his guilt or innocence, Robert R. Bryan, the head of Abu-Jamal's legal team, told IPS.
The application was first turned down by the appeals court last March.
Abu-Jamal, a journalist and political activist, was sentenced to death 26 years ago after being convicted of shooting dead a white Philadelphia police officer in 1981.
His case has been taken up by rights activists in the U.S. and abroad who have contested much of the evidence that was presented to secure his conviction. Abu-Jamal has always maintained his innocence.
"Racism continues to raise its ugly head in this country, and should have no place in our legal system," Bryan said after the appeal court's decision.
"Bigotry lingers [on] today in Philadelphia. It would be naive not to realise that this case continues to reek of politics and injustice."
"In America... people often go to the death chamber because of the incompetence of their lawyers," Bryan said.
"The indisputable facts are that the prosecutor [in the 1982 trial] engaged in racism in selecting the jury in this case," Bryan said. "We will not rest until Mumia is free."
Abu Jamal's Supreme Court petition will focus on a number of issues, including that black jurors were intentionally excluded from his [1982] trial. Studies have shown that white jurors are more ready to pass death sentences than jurors of colour.
It is uncertain whether the court will agree to hear the case, since only between 1 and 2 percent of petitions are heard each year.
But because the three appeal court judges were split two to one on the issue of racism in the jury selection, the Supreme Court might be more likely to hear the case to resolve the differences of opinion.
A Supreme Court ruling in favour of Abu-Jamal would mean that the appeals court would have to reconsider his request for a new trial about his guilt or innocence.
At the same time that the appeals court turned down Abu-Jamals's request for a new trial, it ruled that he deserved a trial limited to determining whether his sentence should be changed from death to life without the possibility of parole.
This appeals court ruling removed the immediate threat that Abu-Jamal will be executed, but it could be overturned.
Bryan is not satisfied with the narrow ruling of the appeals court. He wants a re-trial to prove Abu-Jamal's innocence.
The prosecution is also unhappy and is likely to file its own petition to the Supreme Court, asking it to overturn the appeals court ruling and order Abu-Jamal's sentence remains as death.
In an interview with IPS, Philadelphia district attorney Hugh Burns, the chief prosecutor, said he had not yet made a decision whether to petition the Supreme Court to send Abu-Jamal back to death row to await execution.
Burns said he was confident that racial bias had not influenced Abu-Jamal's original trial. He said it was "not possible" that significant errors had occurred during the trial.
If the Supreme Court refused to hear Abu-Jamal's appeal and agreed to the prosecution's request to reinstate the death penalty, the execution clock would start ticking again, Bryan said.
"Mumia remains very much on death row because this is still under review."
Mark Taylor, a coordinator of Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal and professor of theology and culture at Princeton Theological Institute, said the Abu-Jamal case was a potential embarrassment to important state officials.
The Pennsylvania governor, Ed Rendell, who would order the death warrant for Abu Jamal's execution, was a former chief prosecutor on the case. Ronald Castille, chief justice on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, is a former prosecutor who worked to keep Abu-Jamal in prison. He did not remove himself when the state Supreme Court ruled on Abu-Jamal's case in February.
Taylor said his organisation would continue to hold workshops and teach-ins to keep the public informed and rally support for Abu-Jamal's release.
"We have to continue doing what we have been doing, educating the public about the details of the case and its significance to issues like the death penalty in America, and racism and police brutality and prisons," he said.
RIGHTS-US: Death Row Activist Prepares New Appeal
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43773
By Adrianne Appel
BOSTON, Sep 3 (IPS) - Mumia Abu-Jamal rallied thousands of protesters in the U.S. city of Denver last week who were calling for the release of U.S. political prisoners.
In a recorded message for the crowds protesting outside the Democratic National Convention, journalist Abu-Jamal attacked U.S. foreign policy, the protection of "foreign despots" and war for "foreign pipelines".
Abu-Jamal made the recording from his death row prison cell at a time when his 26-year battle for freedom has reached a critical point.
He and his lawyer are preparing to take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court to ask it to rule on whether the lower courts have denied him justice because of racial bias.
The decision to go to the Supreme Court was taken after a federal appeals court in Philadelphia in July refused to reconsider an application for a new trial about his guilt or innocence, Robert R. Bryan, the head of Abu-Jamal's legal team, told IPS.
The application was first turned down by the appeals court last March.
Abu-Jamal, a journalist and political activist, was sentenced to death 26 years ago after being convicted of shooting dead a white Philadelphia police officer in 1981.
His case has been taken up by rights activists in the U.S. and abroad who have contested much of the evidence that was presented to secure his conviction. Abu-Jamal has always maintained his innocence.
"Racism continues to raise its ugly head in this country, and should have no place in our legal system," Bryan said after the appeal court's decision.
"Bigotry lingers [on] today in Philadelphia. It would be naive not to realise that this case continues to reek of politics and injustice."
"In America... people often go to the death chamber because of the incompetence of their lawyers," Bryan said.
"The indisputable facts are that the prosecutor [in the 1982 trial] engaged in racism in selecting the jury in this case," Bryan said. "We will not rest until Mumia is free."
Abu Jamal's Supreme Court petition will focus on a number of issues, including that black jurors were intentionally excluded from his [1982] trial. Studies have shown that white jurors are more ready to pass death sentences than jurors of colour.
It is uncertain whether the court will agree to hear the case, since only between 1 and 2 percent of petitions are heard each year.
But because the three appeal court judges were split two to one on the issue of racism in the jury selection, the Supreme Court might be more likely to hear the case to resolve the differences of opinion.
A Supreme Court ruling in favour of Abu-Jamal would mean that the appeals court would have to reconsider his request for a new trial about his guilt or innocence.
At the same time that the appeals court turned down Abu-Jamals's request for a new trial, it ruled that he deserved a trial limited to determining whether his sentence should be changed from death to life without the possibility of parole.
This appeals court ruling removed the immediate threat that Abu-Jamal will be executed, but it could be overturned.
Bryan is not satisfied with the narrow ruling of the appeals court. He wants a re-trial to prove Abu-Jamal's innocence.
The prosecution is also unhappy and is likely to file its own petition to the Supreme Court, asking it to overturn the appeals court ruling and order Abu-Jamal's sentence remains as death.
In an interview with IPS, Philadelphia district attorney Hugh Burns, the chief prosecutor, said he had not yet made a decision whether to petition the Supreme Court to send Abu-Jamal back to death row to await execution.
Burns said he was confident that racial bias had not influenced Abu-Jamal's original trial. He said it was "not possible" that significant errors had occurred during the trial.
If the Supreme Court refused to hear Abu-Jamal's appeal and agreed to the prosecution's request to reinstate the death penalty, the execution clock would start ticking again, Bryan said.
"Mumia remains very much on death row because this is still under review."
Mark Taylor, a coordinator of Educators for Mumia Abu-Jamal and professor of theology and culture at Princeton Theological Institute, said the Abu-Jamal case was a potential embarrassment to important state officials.
The Pennsylvania governor, Ed Rendell, who would order the death warrant for Abu Jamal's execution, was a former chief prosecutor on the case. Ronald Castille, chief justice on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, is a former prosecutor who worked to keep Abu-Jamal in prison. He did not remove himself when the state Supreme Court ruled on Abu-Jamal's case in February.
Taylor said his organisation would continue to hold workshops and teach-ins to keep the public informed and rally support for Abu-Jamal's release.
"We have to continue doing what we have been doing, educating the public about the details of the case and its significance to issues like the death penalty in America, and racism and police brutality and prisons," he said.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
PACK the Courtroom for Rebel Diaz this Wednesday!
THE FREE MUMIA ABU-JAMAL COALITION AND INTERNATIONAL CONCERNED FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF MUMIA ABU-JAMAL STRONGLY URGE ALL WHO CAN TO ATTEND THE COURT HEARING FOR BROTHERS G1 AND RODSTARZ OF REBEL DIAZ, WHO WERE BRUTALLY ASSAULTED BY THE POLICE IN JUNE, WHILE THEY WERE QUESTIONING THE POLICE'S HARASSMENT OF A NON-ENGLISH SPEAKING IMMIGRANT STREET VENDOR. THE BROTHERS RECENTLY PERFORMED IN PHILADELPHIA ON JULY 4TH, IN SOLIDARITY WITH MUMIA, ONLY ADDING TO THEIR LONG LIST OF PERFORMANCES IN WHICH THEY ALWAYS MAKE CLEAR "WHICH SIDE" THEY ARE ON.
--------------------------------
This Wednesday September 3rd:
Support G1 and Rodstardz of Rebel Diaz
take a stand against police brutality and come out on
Wednesday September 3rd at 9 a.m.
Part MCP (Room 2-11C -
look them up under Venegas
Pack the
court room of the Bronx Criminal Court House
on 215 E. 161st St.
Bronx New York
Thank you
--------------------------------
This Wednesday September 3rd:
Support G1 and Rodstardz of Rebel Diaz
take a stand against police brutality and come out on
Wednesday September 3rd at 9 a.m.
Part MCP (Room 2-11C -
look them up under Venegas
Pack the
court room of the Bronx Criminal Court House
on 215 E. 161st St.
Bronx New York
Thank you
FILM ON MUMIA FEAT. MOS DEF, SNOOP DOG, ANGELA DAVIS AND OTHERS SCREENING IN NYC
In Prison My Whole Life, a new documentary on the case of Mumia, featuring:
Mumia, Mos Def, Alice Walker, Snoop Dog, Angela Davis, Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky and MANY MORE!
will be screening in NYC this month of September.
Screening 1:
Thursday, Sept 11, 1:45pm
AMC Loews 34th St, Theatre # 11
Screening 2 (spotlight):
Saturday, Sept 13, 6:15pm
AMC Loews 34th St, Theatre # 9
Mumia, Mos Def, Alice Walker, Snoop Dog, Angela Davis, Amy Goodman, Noam Chomsky and MANY MORE!
will be screening in NYC this month of September.
Screening 1:
Thursday, Sept 11, 1:45pm
AMC Loews 34th St, Theatre # 11
Screening 2 (spotlight):
Saturday, Sept 13, 6:15pm
AMC Loews 34th St, Theatre # 9
LONG LIVE BROTHER BASHIR HAMID! LONG LIVE REVOLUTION!
It is with great sadness that we join the different organizations that have paid tribute to Brother Bashir Hameed who made his transition this past Saturday night, August 29th. Some of us first met Bashir in these last months of his life and were moved by his spiritual strength, intellectual clarity, and love for his family and people. We had hoped that the video that Bashir so wanted to do would be approved by the Department of Corrections before he passed, but that was not to happen.
Bashir's history as a militant activist in the Black Panther Party parallels so many of the other histories of our political prisoners of African descent. Born in New Jersey, after confronting the racism of the colleges he attended and that of the US Army, he moved to the Bay Area and in his own words "fell in love with the Black Panther Party". Later, he was sent back to New Jersey to try to rebuild the BPP which had already been decimated by the US government and local police. Within two years, he was either in jail or facing imprisonment for up to 20 years, all for doing regular BPP work, distribution of the party newspaper, the breakfast program, and political education. He ended up spending four years in Trenton State Prison and upon release was immediately again targeted. The Queens 2 case, which included Abdul Majid and himself, involved the alleged killing of two policemen in Queens. Their first trial ended in a hung jury, the second was declared a mistrial with 8 to 4 for "not guilty", and the last involved very questionable witnesses and finally led to the conviction the state wanted, and a sentence of 30+ years to life, with the recommendation that Bashir and Abdul never be paroled.
We say to Bashir's family, to his wife, and to all those who loved and admired him, that Bashir will not be forgotten. Just this past Sunday, at the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement hip hop concert, hundreds of young people learned about who Bashir is, were very moved by Brother Dhoruba's tribute to him, and cheered with great respect as each hip hop artist began his/ her performance with an individual dedication to Bashir. Would that Bashir had heard this in his lifetime, but he knew he would be remembered, and showed that confidence in his last days. Revolutionaries never die!
We extend our condolences to Bashir's devoted mother, Mrs. York, to his son, his sister, his niece (who became a doctor with the encouragement and prodding of her incarcerated uncle and who monitored his medical care in the last years of his life when he faced several serious medical conditions), and to his wife, Florence, who left her home in Texas to spend these last months by her husband's side.
In loving revolutionary memory,
International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Bashir's history as a militant activist in the Black Panther Party parallels so many of the other histories of our political prisoners of African descent. Born in New Jersey, after confronting the racism of the colleges he attended and that of the US Army, he moved to the Bay Area and in his own words "fell in love with the Black Panther Party". Later, he was sent back to New Jersey to try to rebuild the BPP which had already been decimated by the US government and local police. Within two years, he was either in jail or facing imprisonment for up to 20 years, all for doing regular BPP work, distribution of the party newspaper, the breakfast program, and political education. He ended up spending four years in Trenton State Prison and upon release was immediately again targeted. The Queens 2 case, which included Abdul Majid and himself, involved the alleged killing of two policemen in Queens. Their first trial ended in a hung jury, the second was declared a mistrial with 8 to 4 for "not guilty", and the last involved very questionable witnesses and finally led to the conviction the state wanted, and a sentence of 30+ years to life, with the recommendation that Bashir and Abdul never be paroled.
We say to Bashir's family, to his wife, and to all those who loved and admired him, that Bashir will not be forgotten. Just this past Sunday, at the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement hip hop concert, hundreds of young people learned about who Bashir is, were very moved by Brother Dhoruba's tribute to him, and cheered with great respect as each hip hop artist began his/ her performance with an individual dedication to Bashir. Would that Bashir had heard this in his lifetime, but he knew he would be remembered, and showed that confidence in his last days. Revolutionaries never die!
We extend our condolences to Bashir's devoted mother, Mrs. York, to his son, his sister, his niece (who became a doctor with the encouragement and prodding of her incarcerated uncle and who monitored his medical care in the last years of his life when he faced several serious medical conditions), and to his wife, Florence, who left her home in Texas to spend these last months by her husband's side.
In loving revolutionary memory,
International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Bro. Bashir Hameed is now among the ancestors
via: Queen Sis. Iyaluua Ferguson
-------------
The news of Bashir's passing is too sad for me to comprehend. It saddens me but it also angers me. We have said over and over again that the beast intends to only release our political prisoners in a pine box. And what is our response? We don't have yet a coordinated plan to bring about their release on our terms. We continue to be static, to treat gov. paterson with kid gloves, and to make speeches, but have no real plan for action. MalcolmX has told us that it is not sadness that will free us, but legitimate, heartfelt anger (and rage) that leads to action that will set us free.
I mourn the passing of my brother. My prayers and my heart go out to the Hameed family and particularly to Mrs. York, that very courageous woman who never stopped working for the release of her son. But my sympathy and condolences also go out to all of us who have lost a warrior, a brother in our struggle, who we cannot replace and who we are not yet able to redeem.
Bashir, I miss you. Jericho, we must not let his life be in vain. Please let us find a way to stop this genocide, this murder of our best and our bravest.
Iyaluua
Sunday 8/31
Dear Friends & Comrades;
I spoke with Florence this a.m. and she asked that all sympathy & condolence
cards be sent to the Hameed Family at 511 Winton Street, Philadelphia, PA 19148
Thank you
Paulette
-------------
The news of Bashir's passing is too sad for me to comprehend. It saddens me but it also angers me. We have said over and over again that the beast intends to only release our political prisoners in a pine box. And what is our response? We don't have yet a coordinated plan to bring about their release on our terms. We continue to be static, to treat gov. paterson with kid gloves, and to make speeches, but have no real plan for action. MalcolmX has told us that it is not sadness that will free us, but legitimate, heartfelt anger (and rage) that leads to action that will set us free.
I mourn the passing of my brother. My prayers and my heart go out to the Hameed family and particularly to Mrs. York, that very courageous woman who never stopped working for the release of her son. But my sympathy and condolences also go out to all of us who have lost a warrior, a brother in our struggle, who we cannot replace and who we are not yet able to redeem.
Bashir, I miss you. Jericho, we must not let his life be in vain. Please let us find a way to stop this genocide, this murder of our best and our bravest.
Iyaluua
Sunday 8/31
Dear Friends & Comrades;
I spoke with Florence this a.m. and she asked that all sympathy & condolence
cards be sent to the Hameed Family at 511 Winton Street, Philadelphia, PA 19148
Thank you
Paulette
Monday, August 25, 2008
Goddard IMA Commencement Speech by Alumni Mumia Abu-Jamal
By Taína Asili
This year's graduating class of the Individualized Master of Arts program at Goddard College proudly invited Mumia Abu-Jamal to be the keynote speaker of their commencement this past Sunday, August 10th 2008. It was a unanimous decision made by all of the graduates to invite Abu-Jamal, alumni of the college, to shed his wisdom and insight as a renowned journalist, freedom-fighter, and scholar.
Mumia Abu-Jamal first walked upon the grassy hills of Vermont's alternative college as a student working towards his BA in the 1970's. Unable to complete his degree work then, it was Goddard who he once again approached in the 1990's, yet this time as a U.S. political prisoner. He chose Goddard because, "Goddard was ahead of the curve, transforming individuals and their respective communities by expanding the realm of knowledge based on the fundamental principles of democracy."
It was during this work that he met his adviser and ally, Margo MacLeod, who guided Abu-Jamal through the difficult process of completing his BA degree from behind prison walls. Years later, MacLeod became the founder and Program Director of the IMA program, which these graduates have just completed, helping to support a unique form of education for hundreds of students, just as she had for Abu-Jamal. It is for this reason MacLeod, who is no longer working at the college as of this year, was chosen by the graduates to introduce Abu-Jamal during their commencement. In her introduction MacLeod shares, "It seems to me that Mumia has achieved the kind of integration of body, mind, and spirit that we strive for within this program, and that each graduate today has achieved in some measure in their work."
Following MacLeod's introduction, Abu-Jamal's voice rang strong through two large speakers facing the audience, a packed house of eleven graduates, their family members, fellow students and college faculty. Some graduates had worried that not having his physical body present might create a vacant atmosphere. However, this fear was dispelled, as evidenced by the resounding standing ovation following his speech by a great majority of those in attendance.
During this passionate speech Abu-Jamal shared his fond feelings towards the college, and his appreciation for what he termed "one of the finest and most unique colleges in the country." He also warned the graduates, "You leave Goddard at a time when the nation and the world faces serious challenges, as do indeed you all. What the nation needs, and indeed what the world needs as well, is new clear thinking about the challenges facing us." Later adding, "But as Goddard grads you are all fully equipped with the ability to think, a faculty I might add not much in evidence in our national political life I'm afraid. But this ability when used critically and flexibly may yet result in finding sane, humane solutions to our problems."
Read more
This year's graduating class of the Individualized Master of Arts program at Goddard College proudly invited Mumia Abu-Jamal to be the keynote speaker of their commencement this past Sunday, August 10th 2008. It was a unanimous decision made by all of the graduates to invite Abu-Jamal, alumni of the college, to shed his wisdom and insight as a renowned journalist, freedom-fighter, and scholar.
Mumia Abu-Jamal first walked upon the grassy hills of Vermont's alternative college as a student working towards his BA in the 1970's. Unable to complete his degree work then, it was Goddard who he once again approached in the 1990's, yet this time as a U.S. political prisoner. He chose Goddard because, "Goddard was ahead of the curve, transforming individuals and their respective communities by expanding the realm of knowledge based on the fundamental principles of democracy."
It was during this work that he met his adviser and ally, Margo MacLeod, who guided Abu-Jamal through the difficult process of completing his BA degree from behind prison walls. Years later, MacLeod became the founder and Program Director of the IMA program, which these graduates have just completed, helping to support a unique form of education for hundreds of students, just as she had for Abu-Jamal. It is for this reason MacLeod, who is no longer working at the college as of this year, was chosen by the graduates to introduce Abu-Jamal during their commencement. In her introduction MacLeod shares, "It seems to me that Mumia has achieved the kind of integration of body, mind, and spirit that we strive for within this program, and that each graduate today has achieved in some measure in their work."
Following MacLeod's introduction, Abu-Jamal's voice rang strong through two large speakers facing the audience, a packed house of eleven graduates, their family members, fellow students and college faculty. Some graduates had worried that not having his physical body present might create a vacant atmosphere. However, this fear was dispelled, as evidenced by the resounding standing ovation following his speech by a great majority of those in attendance.
During this passionate speech Abu-Jamal shared his fond feelings towards the college, and his appreciation for what he termed "one of the finest and most unique colleges in the country." He also warned the graduates, "You leave Goddard at a time when the nation and the world faces serious challenges, as do indeed you all. What the nation needs, and indeed what the world needs as well, is new clear thinking about the challenges facing us." Later adding, "But as Goddard grads you are all fully equipped with the ability to think, a faculty I might add not much in evidence in our national political life I'm afraid. But this ability when used critically and flexibly may yet result in finding sane, humane solutions to our problems."
Read more
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Support Parole Transfers for Herman & Jalil
Contact Governors of NY & CA (SF-8 case)
Herman & Jalil are issuing this urgent message requesting friends and supporters to contact the Governors of New York and California to expedite the signing and execution of amended Executive Agreements, which will allow Judge Moscone to issue an order to return them both to NY State to attend their parole hearings.
In 2007, Herman and Jail were extradited from New York State to California to face charges in the SF8 case. Both were scheduled for parole hearings on their New York sentences in the spring of 2008. It would have been their third appearance before the board. Under a New York parole regulation, however, no hearing can be held unless they are physically present.
On May 18, 2008, SF Judge Moscone agreed with the consent of the state prosecutor and the SF County Sheriff to return them both to NY State for parole hearings--their legal right after more than 35 years of imprisonment.
On June 16th, Judge Moscone rescinded his May 18th order due to pressure from the CA Attorney General's office, and held the transfer in abeyance until new language was adopted to conform with the concerns of the Attorney General. The Attorney General's office has drafted an amended Executive Agreement which would allow the brothers to return to New York, although the Attorney General has refused to disclose the text of the amended agreement to the brothers or their attorneys. According to the Attorney General's office the amended Executive Agreements have been sent to California's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and New York's Governor Paterson to be signed.
Herman and Jalil have a liberty interest in returning to New York. If these brothers were granted parole, then it is likely that they would also be granted bail in the SF8 case. All other brothers in the SF8 case are out on bail despite the severity of the charges. The Attorney General's tactics to prevent Herman and Jalil from returning to New York to attend their parole hearings infringes upon the brothers right to liberty.
If parole hearings await the resolution of the SF8 charges, it could be another year or two before Herman and Jalil are given hearings.
Please contact the Governors of New York and California by phone, letter or email
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-558-3160
Email: http://gov.ca.gov/interact#email
David A. Paterson
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
518-474-8390
Email: http://161.11.121.121/govemail
Urge them to sign the amended Executive Agreements which will allow Herman Bell and Jalil Muntaqim (Anthony Bottom) to return to New York State to attend their rightful parole hearings.
Herman & Jalil are issuing this urgent message requesting friends and supporters to contact the Governors of New York and California to expedite the signing and execution of amended Executive Agreements, which will allow Judge Moscone to issue an order to return them both to NY State to attend their parole hearings.
In 2007, Herman and Jail were extradited from New York State to California to face charges in the SF8 case. Both were scheduled for parole hearings on their New York sentences in the spring of 2008. It would have been their third appearance before the board. Under a New York parole regulation, however, no hearing can be held unless they are physically present.
On May 18, 2008, SF Judge Moscone agreed with the consent of the state prosecutor and the SF County Sheriff to return them both to NY State for parole hearings--their legal right after more than 35 years of imprisonment.
On June 16th, Judge Moscone rescinded his May 18th order due to pressure from the CA Attorney General's office, and held the transfer in abeyance until new language was adopted to conform with the concerns of the Attorney General. The Attorney General's office has drafted an amended Executive Agreement which would allow the brothers to return to New York, although the Attorney General has refused to disclose the text of the amended agreement to the brothers or their attorneys. According to the Attorney General's office the amended Executive Agreements have been sent to California's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and New York's Governor Paterson to be signed.
Herman and Jalil have a liberty interest in returning to New York. If these brothers were granted parole, then it is likely that they would also be granted bail in the SF8 case. All other brothers in the SF8 case are out on bail despite the severity of the charges. The Attorney General's tactics to prevent Herman and Jalil from returning to New York to attend their parole hearings infringes upon the brothers right to liberty.
If parole hearings await the resolution of the SF8 charges, it could be another year or two before Herman and Jalil are given hearings.
Please contact the Governors of New York and California by phone, letter or email
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-558-3160
Email: http://gov.ca.gov/interact#email
David A. Paterson
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
518-474-8390
Email: http://161.11.121.121/govemail
Urge them to sign the amended Executive Agreements which will allow Herman Bell and Jalil Muntaqim (Anthony Bottom) to return to New York State to attend their rightful parole hearings.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Special Radio Interview with Mike Africa
The Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition urges you to listen in on Thursday, August 21st from 8-9 pm to "Where We Live" on WBAI-FM Radio (99.5 FM or streaming live at www.wbai.org). Host Sally O'Brien will be interviewing Mike Africa of the MOVE organization about next week's film screening of "The Bombing of Osage Avenue."
This movie is about the horrific murder-by-bombing of 11 MOVE women, men and children and many animals by the very same Philadelphia establishment that's murderously intent on shutting up Mumia Abu-Jamal. "Collateral damage" encompassed more than a city block and a half of homes and shocked the world. The movie won the 1986 Academy Award for best documentary; Ramona Africa, the only adult survivor of the massacre, will be present. It is directed by Louis Massiah and narrated by Toni Cade Bambara -- and you can see it on Thursday, August 28th, at 7:30 pm at the Brecht Forum, 451 West Street (between Bank and Bethune Streets.)
Thursday, August 21 @ 8PM
"Where We Live" Hosted by Sally O'Brien
WBAI Radio 99.5-FM
(streaming live @ www.wbai.org)
For more info call the Mumia Coalition Hotline: 212 330-8029
This movie is about the horrific murder-by-bombing of 11 MOVE women, men and children and many animals by the very same Philadelphia establishment that's murderously intent on shutting up Mumia Abu-Jamal. "Collateral damage" encompassed more than a city block and a half of homes and shocked the world. The movie won the 1986 Academy Award for best documentary; Ramona Africa, the only adult survivor of the massacre, will be present. It is directed by Louis Massiah and narrated by Toni Cade Bambara -- and you can see it on Thursday, August 28th, at 7:30 pm at the Brecht Forum, 451 West Street (between Bank and Bethune Streets.)
Thursday, August 21 @ 8PM
"Where We Live" Hosted by Sally O'Brien
WBAI Radio 99.5-FM
(streaming live @ www.wbai.org)
For more info call the Mumia Coalition Hotline: 212 330-8029
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Philadelphia Town Hall Saturday, August 9th at noon
Now is the time for all of us organizers in the people's movements to be the voice for Mumia, as he has been for all of us. Get the flyer out at all our demos, rallies, meetings, and send to your listservs. Pam Africa wants everybody to know that the court has tried to make it impossible for Mumia to ever be released from jail alive. Mumia is innocent and we want his freedom, not a life or death sentence.
Come to Philly on Saturday, August 9th, where we'll organize to free Mumia and to change the parole rules which have denied freedom to the innocent MOVE 9.
To reserve a seat on the bus from New York,
call 212/330-8029 or
email info@freemumia.com.
Download the flyer
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
EMERGENCY MEETING THIS FRIDAY NIGHT, JULY 25th with Attorney Soffiyah Elijah
Given the bad news we just received regarding the Third Circuit's refusal to reconsider Mumia's appeal, and the limited legal options now open to him, we have decided to call this open meeting for all interested and able to come. We know it is very short notice but Attorney Soffiyah Elija, who is one of Mumia's attorneys at this stage of the proceedings and who just visited Mumia this past Monday, is only available this Friday.
So join us to better understand the legal situation and to plan our next steps of RESISTANCE!
PLACE: St. Mary's Church basement
521 West 126th Street
TIME: 6:30 PM
We will have very light refreshments. Feel free to bring food.
Hope to see you on Friday.
ONA MOVE!
The Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
So join us to better understand the legal situation and to plan our next steps of RESISTANCE!
PLACE: St. Mary's Church basement
521 West 126th Street
TIME: 6:30 PM
We will have very light refreshments. Feel free to bring food.
Hope to see you on Friday.
ONA MOVE!
The Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition (NYC)
Legal Update from Mumia's Attorney
July 22, 2008
From: Robert R. Bryan, lead counsel
Subject: Federal ruling regarding Mumia Abu-Jamal, death row, Pennsylvania
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia
Today our Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, submitted on behalf of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, was denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Simply put, we did not receive the needed majority vote from the nine sitting judges; at least five votes for a rehearing were necessary. However, Justice Thomas L. Ambro continues to urge the granting of relief on the issue of racism in jury selection. That position, as detailed in his brilliant dissenting opinion of March 27, 2008, will continue to serve as a beacon of hope as we press on for a new trial and Mumia's freedom. Judge Ambro said that the "core guarantee of equal protection, ensuring citizens that their State will not discriminate on account of race, would be meaningless were we to approve the exclusion of jurors on the basis of . . . race. . . . I respectfully dissent." A copy of today's decision is attached.
Reaction Mumia and I had a legal conference this afternoon. He, as I, was stunned by the federal court's refusal to grant relief since it flies in the face of established legal precedent in both the U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. I am furious because racism continues to raise its ugly head in this country, and should have no place in our legal system. The indisputable facts are that the prosecutor engaged in racism in selecting the jury in this case, and that bigotry lingers today in Philadelphia. It would be naive not to realize that this case continues to reek of politics and injustice.
U.S. Supreme Court We will be seeking relief in the Supreme Court. The Petition for Writ of Certiorari will be filed by October 20, 2008, unless there is an extension. The racism issue will be presented, along with the fact that the prosecutor made misrepresentations to the jury in order to obtain a murder conviction against Mumia.
Conclusion My goal remains a complete reversal of the conviction, even though the federal court has already granted a new jury trial on the question of the death penalty. We will not rest until Mumia is free.
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
*As to panel rehearing only.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Nos. 01-9014 & 02-9001
MUMIA ABU-JAMAL,
a/k/a WESLEY COOK
Mumia Abu-Jamal,
Appellant at No 02-9001
v.
MARTIN HORN,
PENNSYLVANIA DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS;
CONNER BLAINE, SUPERINTENDENT, SCI GREENE;
DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR PHILADELPHIA COUNTY;
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Appellants at No. 01-9014
(D.C. Civ. No. 99-cv-5089)
SUR PETITION FOR REHEARING
Present: SCIRICA, Chief Judge,
SLOVITER, BARRY, AMBRO, FUENTES, SMITH,
CHAGARES, JORDAN, HARDIMAN and COWEN*, Circuit Judges.
The petition for rehearing filed by appellee/cross-appellant Mumia Abu-Jamal in the above-entitled case having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this Court and to all the other available circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, and a majority of the circuit judges of the circuit in regular service not having voted for rehearing, the petition for rehearing by the panel and the Court en banc, is denied. Judge Ambro would grant rehearing en banc.
BY THE COURT,
/s/ Anthony J. Scirica
Chief Judge
Dated: July 22, 2008
CMD/cc: Robert R. Bryan, Esq.
Judith L. Ritter, Esq.
Hugh J. Burns, Jr., Esq.
Ronald Eisenberg, Esq.
Christina Swarns, Esq.
Jill Elijah, Esq.
From: Robert R. Bryan, lead counsel
Subject: Federal ruling regarding Mumia Abu-Jamal, death row, Pennsylvania
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia
Today our Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, submitted on behalf of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, was denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Simply put, we did not receive the needed majority vote from the nine sitting judges; at least five votes for a rehearing were necessary. However, Justice Thomas L. Ambro continues to urge the granting of relief on the issue of racism in jury selection. That position, as detailed in his brilliant dissenting opinion of March 27, 2008, will continue to serve as a beacon of hope as we press on for a new trial and Mumia's freedom. Judge Ambro said that the "core guarantee of equal protection, ensuring citizens that their State will not discriminate on account of race, would be meaningless were we to approve the exclusion of jurors on the basis of . . . race. . . . I respectfully dissent." A copy of today's decision is attached.
Reaction Mumia and I had a legal conference this afternoon. He, as I, was stunned by the federal court's refusal to grant relief since it flies in the face of established legal precedent in both the U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. I am furious because racism continues to raise its ugly head in this country, and should have no place in our legal system. The indisputable facts are that the prosecutor engaged in racism in selecting the jury in this case, and that bigotry lingers today in Philadelphia. It would be naive not to realize that this case continues to reek of politics and injustice.
U.S. Supreme Court We will be seeking relief in the Supreme Court. The Petition for Writ of Certiorari will be filed by October 20, 2008, unless there is an extension. The racism issue will be presented, along with the fact that the prosecutor made misrepresentations to the jury in order to obtain a murder conviction against Mumia.
Conclusion My goal remains a complete reversal of the conviction, even though the federal court has already granted a new jury trial on the question of the death penalty. We will not rest until Mumia is free.
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
*As to panel rehearing only.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
Nos. 01-9014 & 02-9001
MUMIA ABU-JAMAL,
a/k/a WESLEY COOK
Mumia Abu-Jamal,
Appellant at No 02-9001
v.
MARTIN HORN,
PENNSYLVANIA DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS;
CONNER BLAINE, SUPERINTENDENT, SCI GREENE;
DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR PHILADELPHIA COUNTY;
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Appellants at No. 01-9014
(D.C. Civ. No. 99-cv-5089)
SUR PETITION FOR REHEARING
Present: SCIRICA, Chief Judge,
SLOVITER, BARRY, AMBRO, FUENTES, SMITH,
CHAGARES, JORDAN, HARDIMAN and COWEN*, Circuit Judges.
The petition for rehearing filed by appellee/cross-appellant Mumia Abu-Jamal in the above-entitled case having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this Court and to all the other available circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, and a majority of the circuit judges of the circuit in regular service not having voted for rehearing, the petition for rehearing by the panel and the Court en banc, is denied. Judge Ambro would grant rehearing en banc.
BY THE COURT,
/s/ Anthony J. Scirica
Chief Judge
Dated: July 22, 2008
CMD/cc: Robert R. Bryan, Esq.
Judith L. Ritter, Esq.
Hugh J. Burns, Jr., Esq.
Ronald Eisenberg, Esq.
Christina Swarns, Esq.
Jill Elijah, Esq.
Abu-Jamal loses latest appeal for new trial
By Emilie Lounsberry
Inquirer Staff Writer
Posted on Tue, Jul. 22, 2008:
A federal appeals court yesterday refused to reconsider the decision denying a new trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal in the 1981 murder of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner.
In a two-page decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied Abu-Jamal's request for a rehearing of his appeal in the controversial case, which has helped fuel an international debate about the death penalty.
Abu-Jamal's lawyer, Robert R. Bryan of San Francisco, said he planned to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case.
In March, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit left intact Abu-Jamal's conviction but said a new jury should decide whether he deserved death or should be sentenced to life behind bars.
Deputy District Attorney Ronald Eisenberg said no decision had been made on whether his office would ask the high court to reinstate the death sentence.
Abu-Jamal and his lawyers contend that the panel should have ordered a hearing on their contention that prosecutors intentionally excluded blacks from his jury in violation of a later 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
They noted that one of the panel members, Judge Thomas Ambro, wanted a hearing held on that issue, though he was in the minority on that issue.
All three members of the panel, which also included Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica and Judge Robert E. Cowen, affirmed the December 2001 decision by U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr., who threw out the death sentence.
Yohn concluded that the jury might have been confused by the trial judge's instructions and wording on the verdict form filled out when the jury decided on death.
He found that the jury might have mistakenly believed it had to agree unanimously on any mitigating circumstances - factors that might have persuaded the jury to decide on a life sentence, rather than death.
Abu-Jamal, 54, has been on death row since his 1982 conviction in the killing of Faulkner, who was shot to death near 13th and Locust Streets early on Dec. 9, 1981.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld his conviction and death sentence in 1989, and also rejected three other appeals.
Unless the nation's high court agrees to hear the case, Abu-Jamal most likely would face a new Philadelphia jury to decide only whether the penalty should be life or death. The high court hears only a tiny percentage of all petitions filed each year.
Contact staff writer Emilie Lounsberry at 215-854-4828 or elounsberry@phillynews.com
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/news_breaking/20080722_Abu-Jamal_loses_latest_appeal_for_new_trial.html
Inquirer Staff Writer
Posted on Tue, Jul. 22, 2008:
A federal appeals court yesterday refused to reconsider the decision denying a new trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal in the 1981 murder of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner.
In a two-page decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied Abu-Jamal's request for a rehearing of his appeal in the controversial case, which has helped fuel an international debate about the death penalty.
Abu-Jamal's lawyer, Robert R. Bryan of San Francisco, said he planned to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case.
In March, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit left intact Abu-Jamal's conviction but said a new jury should decide whether he deserved death or should be sentenced to life behind bars.
Deputy District Attorney Ronald Eisenberg said no decision had been made on whether his office would ask the high court to reinstate the death sentence.
Abu-Jamal and his lawyers contend that the panel should have ordered a hearing on their contention that prosecutors intentionally excluded blacks from his jury in violation of a later 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
They noted that one of the panel members, Judge Thomas Ambro, wanted a hearing held on that issue, though he was in the minority on that issue.
All three members of the panel, which also included Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica and Judge Robert E. Cowen, affirmed the December 2001 decision by U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr., who threw out the death sentence.
Yohn concluded that the jury might have been confused by the trial judge's instructions and wording on the verdict form filled out when the jury decided on death.
He found that the jury might have mistakenly believed it had to agree unanimously on any mitigating circumstances - factors that might have persuaded the jury to decide on a life sentence, rather than death.
Abu-Jamal, 54, has been on death row since his 1982 conviction in the killing of Faulkner, who was shot to death near 13th and Locust Streets early on Dec. 9, 1981.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld his conviction and death sentence in 1989, and also rejected three other appeals.
Unless the nation's high court agrees to hear the case, Abu-Jamal most likely would face a new Philadelphia jury to decide only whether the penalty should be life or death. The high court hears only a tiny percentage of all petitions filed each year.
Contact staff writer Emilie Lounsberry at 215-854-4828 or elounsberry@phillynews.com
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/news_breaking/20080722_Abu-Jamal_loses_latest_appeal_for_new_trial.html
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Thursday, July 10, 2008
News From The Worldwide Movement to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal
The Paris-based National United Collective In Solidarity with Mumia Abu-Jamal joined in the annual Die-In against the reinstatement of the U.S. Death Penalty and for the release of Mumia on Wednesday evening, July 2, 2008. The Collective acted in solidarity with the U.S. actions to mark the 26th anniversary of Mumia's unjust conviction and death sentence. The dramatic Die-In on Place de la Concorde is in full view of the tourist attraction of the Eiffel Tower and directly in front of the U.S. Embassy, where the Collective has held weekly vigils in solidarity with Mumia for many years. This is the 13th annual Die-In, performed in coalition with anti-Death Penalty groups, and attracts hundred who die-iin and bear silent witness. France abolished the Death Penalty in 1981.
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
Legal Update from Mumia's Attorney
Date: July 8, 2008
From: Robert R. Bryan, lead counsel
Subject: Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, United States
Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit, filed on behalf of Mumia Abu-Jamal,
death row, Pennsylvania
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia On June 27, 2008, I submitted on behalf of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, a Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Yesterday it was deemed "filed" by the court following rulings on related motions. The focus of the Petition is the issue of racism in jury selection. If unsuccessful, we will proceed to the United States Supreme Court.
Below are two news articles concerning the Petition. Today's Philadelphia Inquirer piece gives an overview of this newest development, while that by Dave Lindorff is a brilliant analysis of these case developments and its politics. A copy of the actual Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, which is before the federal court, is attached.
Donations for Mumia's Legal Defense in the U.S. To make tax deductible donations to the legal defense, please make checks payable to the National Lawyers Guild Foundation (indicate "Mumia" on the bottom left). They should be mailed to:
Committee To Save Mumia Abu-Jamal
P.O. Box 2012
New York, NY 10159-2012
Conclusion Even though the federal court granted a new jury trial on the question of the death penalty, we want a complete reversal of the conviction. I will not rest until my client is free.
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
RobertRBryan@aol.com
From: Robert R. Bryan, lead counsel
Subject: Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, United States
Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit, filed on behalf of Mumia Abu-Jamal,
death row, Pennsylvania
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia On June 27, 2008, I submitted on behalf of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, a Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Yesterday it was deemed "filed" by the court following rulings on related motions. The focus of the Petition is the issue of racism in jury selection. If unsuccessful, we will proceed to the United States Supreme Court.
Below are two news articles concerning the Petition. Today's Philadelphia Inquirer piece gives an overview of this newest development, while that by Dave Lindorff is a brilliant analysis of these case developments and its politics. A copy of the actual Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc, which is before the federal court, is attached.
Donations for Mumia's Legal Defense in the U.S. To make tax deductible donations to the legal defense, please make checks payable to the National Lawyers Guild Foundation (indicate "Mumia" on the bottom left). They should be mailed to:
Committee To Save Mumia Abu-Jamal
P.O. Box 2012
New York, NY 10159-2012
Conclusion Even though the federal court granted a new jury trial on the question of the death penalty, we want a complete reversal of the conviction. I will not rest until my client is free.
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
RobertRBryan@aol.com
Mumia Abu-Jamal's Long-Shot Appeal for Reversal of Last Year's Disastrous Third Circuit Ruling
Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/Mumia-Abu-Jamal-s-Long-Sho-by-Dave-Lindorff-080707-97.html
OpEdNews
July 7, 2008
By Dave Lindorff
Mumia Abu-Jamal and his attorney Robert R. Bryan yesterday filed a formal petition seeking a full en banc reconsideration of last spring’s decision by a three-member panel of the Third Circuit Federal Court of Appeals rejecting his claim of a constitutional violation in the selection of jurors at his 1982 murder trial in the shooting death of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner.
The three-judge panel, in a 2-1 ruling, rejected Abu-Jamal’s claim of a so-called Batson violation namely that the city prosecutor trying his case had denied him a fair trial by improperly barring qualified African Americans from sitting on his jury. The two judges in the majority--both appointed to their posts by President Ronald Reagan--stated that Abu-Jamal had failed to raise the issue at the time of his trial, and that he had failed to make a prima facie case of racial discrimination.
In their majority opinion rejecting Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim, Judge Anthony Scirica and Judge Robert Cowan had argued that even though it was demonstrably true that Assistant DA Joseph McGill had used 10 of his 15 peremptory challenges to reject two-thirds of the potential black jurors who had agreed that they could vote for a death penalty in the case, it could not be seen as a prima facie case of impermissible racial discrimination, because no one had established the racial make-up of the total jury pool. In other words, as one of the two judges actually stated during the hearing, “perhaps the jury pool itself was two-thirds black.” The majority also ruled that because Abu-Jamal had not formally raised the objection about the number of racial jury strikes at the time they occurred, his claim was denied.
As attorney Bryan pointed out in his request for a re-examination of the ruling by the full Third Circuit panel of 12 judges, however, both these arguments fly in the face of both US Supreme Court and Third Circuit precedents. Under Batson, a defendant, in order to obtain a full hearing into the issue of race discrimination in jury selection, need only demonstrate that one single juror was improperly rejected by the prosecution on the basis of race. Furthermore, both those courts have also established that all relevant issues must be taken into consideration, not just the juror strike (dismissal) rate. Bryan noted, for example, that the case was racially charged, given that the defendant was black and the victim was white, and that it was especially charged, given that the defendant had been a Black Panther and had been associated with the MOVE organization, while the victim had been a police officer. Both the Supreme Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals have held that such issues can contribute to making a prima facie case of discrimination, yet neither was considered by the three-judge panel in its ruling in this case. Bryan also noted that at the time of the trial, there was no Batson standard to raise an objection to (the US Supreme Court’s Batson standard was established in 1986, but was made retroactive for all cases). Indeed, in 1982, at the time of Abu-Jamal’s trial, it was technically legal for prosecutors to reject jurors on the basis of race, so he and his trial attorney would have been making a pointless objection at trial had they formally complained back then.
All these points, Bryan argues in his petition for a re-consideration of his client's Batson claim, were also powerfully made in a dissent by the third appellate judge, Thomas Ambro (a Clinton appointee), who charged that his two senior colleagues on the bench were making “a newly created contemporaneous objection rule for habeas petitions,” which he warned would conflict with all the court's prior decisions.
Judge Ambro, Bryan points out, also was dismissive in his dissent of his two colleagues’ claim that they needed to know the composition of the jury pool before they could say the prosecutor’s dismissal of two thirds of the qualified black jurors might constitute improper discrimination in jury selection. “It is my belief,” he wrote, “that this strike rate without reference to total venire (jury pool) can stand on its own for the purpose of raising an inference of discrimination.”
In any event, Bryan went on to demonstrate, using the trial transcript record and some simple math, that in fact the racial composition of the original jury pool can be established: it was 14 blacks and 31 whites, or in other words, 31 percent black. Since it has been stipulated by the district attorney’s office, and accepted as fact by the state courts, that the prosecutor used his ability to dismiss jurors peremptorily (without cause) to eliminate 10 black jurors already considered acceptable by the court, that gives the prosecution a strike rate of 66.67 percent, or more than double the actual percentage of available black jurors in the pool. Admittedly it would have been better had the defense been able to make that damning point at the Third Circuit hearing last year, when the two Republican judges on the bench were demanding it, properly or not. That said, it is still a point that the full Third Circuit bench should consider carefully, in examining lst year's bizarre ruling by the three-judge panel of Scirica, Cowen and Ambro.
' The challenge faced by Abu-Jamal in this bid for a reconsideration of his Batson claim ruling is that the three judges who already ruled, including Judge Cowen, could be part of any en banc reconsideration. Judge Marjorie Rendell, one of the 12 active members of the Third Circuit, has recused herself from the hearing because her husband, Gov. Ed Rendell, was district attorney and as such was boss of the prosecutor, Joe McGill, when the case was tried. Another judge, Clinton appointee Theodore McKee, also recused himself, as did Bush appointee D. Michael Fisher. Ordinarily, en banc deliberations are limited to active judges, but Judge Cowen, though retired, might be able to participate, since he was one of the judges who issued the ruling in question. If Judge Cowan did not participate in an en banc session, that would mean four additional judges would have to side with Judge Ambro, for a reversal and an order for a hearing on Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim. If Cowan were to join the bench, however, that would mean a total of 10 judges, and thus a majority of six--or five in addition to Ambro--would be needed for a reversal.
Without Cowan, the odds would be daunting enough. Even if the other two Clinton appointees to the Third Circuit Court and one remaining Carter appointee were to side with Ambro, Abu-Jamal would need one Bush appointee to come over to get five votes for a reversal. With Cowan voting, five votes would just give a tie, leaving last year’s ruling standing. For a reversal, a second Bush appointee would have to be swayed to Abu-Jamal’s side.
That is quite a hurdle. Then again, stranger things have happened: One of the key Third Circuit rulings establishing the precedent that it should be relatively easy for a death row prisoner to establish prima facie evidence of race-based jury selection (to which Judge Ambro referred when he said his colleagues were ignoring the precedents of their own circuit) and gain a full hearing of the evidence, was written by a recent member of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Samuel Alito. Alito, recall, left the Third Circuit when he was appointed last year to the Supreme Court by Bush.
Technically, what Abu-Jamal is seeking at this point is an order from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals for a full Batson hearing, at which all evidence could be presented, and the prosecution questioned, about the prevailing practice by the district attorney's office in 1982 of excluding blacks from juries in Philadelphia (academic research shows that under Rendell's direction, prosecutors struck blacks from capital-case juries 58 percent of the time, compared to only 22 percent for whites), the record of prosecutor Joe McGill (who records show struck black jurors from the capital cases he tried 74 percent of the time, vs. 25 percent of the time for whites), and about what actually happened during jury selection process at Abu-Jamal's own trial, when two-thirds of black jurors were struck by the prosecutor.
If a judge were to establish after such a hearing that there was a racial motive behind McGill's actions during jury selection, or during the removal of one seated black juror early in the trial, or that even one juror was removed for racial reasons, under Batson rules, it would result automatically in Abu-Jamal's getting a new trial before a new, fairly selected jury.
The Third Circuit drama over Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim plays out as evidence continues to mount that his trial was a sham and a travestry. Among these are new photographs showing: 1) police manipulation of the evidence at the crime scene, 2) a lack of any bullet holes in the sidewalk surrounding the spot where officer Faulkner was lying when he was allegedly shot by Abu-Jamal, and 3) no indication of a taxi cab parked where cab driver Robert Chobert, a key prosecution “eye-witness,” claimed he had been located during the shooting incident. Other credible witnesses are also surfacing with evidence that there was never a shouted out “confession” in Jefferson Hospital’s emergency room, and that witness Chobert was actually not a witness to the shooting, but was rather parked on another street, facing away from the incident.
The District Attorney’s office is expected to file a counter petition opposing an en banc review of last year's Third Circuit ruling.
....................................................................................
Authors Website: http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
Authors Bio: Dave Lindorff, a columnist for Counterpunch, is author of several recent books ("This Can't Be Happening! Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy" and "Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal"). His latest book, coauthored with Barbara Olshanshky, is "The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office (St. Martin's Press, May 2006). His writing is available at http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
OpEdNews
July 7, 2008
By Dave Lindorff
Mumia Abu-Jamal and his attorney Robert R. Bryan yesterday filed a formal petition seeking a full en banc reconsideration of last spring’s decision by a three-member panel of the Third Circuit Federal Court of Appeals rejecting his claim of a constitutional violation in the selection of jurors at his 1982 murder trial in the shooting death of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner.
The three-judge panel, in a 2-1 ruling, rejected Abu-Jamal’s claim of a so-called Batson violation namely that the city prosecutor trying his case had denied him a fair trial by improperly barring qualified African Americans from sitting on his jury. The two judges in the majority--both appointed to their posts by President Ronald Reagan--stated that Abu-Jamal had failed to raise the issue at the time of his trial, and that he had failed to make a prima facie case of racial discrimination.
In their majority opinion rejecting Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim, Judge Anthony Scirica and Judge Robert Cowan had argued that even though it was demonstrably true that Assistant DA Joseph McGill had used 10 of his 15 peremptory challenges to reject two-thirds of the potential black jurors who had agreed that they could vote for a death penalty in the case, it could not be seen as a prima facie case of impermissible racial discrimination, because no one had established the racial make-up of the total jury pool. In other words, as one of the two judges actually stated during the hearing, “perhaps the jury pool itself was two-thirds black.” The majority also ruled that because Abu-Jamal had not formally raised the objection about the number of racial jury strikes at the time they occurred, his claim was denied.
As attorney Bryan pointed out in his request for a re-examination of the ruling by the full Third Circuit panel of 12 judges, however, both these arguments fly in the face of both US Supreme Court and Third Circuit precedents. Under Batson, a defendant, in order to obtain a full hearing into the issue of race discrimination in jury selection, need only demonstrate that one single juror was improperly rejected by the prosecution on the basis of race. Furthermore, both those courts have also established that all relevant issues must be taken into consideration, not just the juror strike (dismissal) rate. Bryan noted, for example, that the case was racially charged, given that the defendant was black and the victim was white, and that it was especially charged, given that the defendant had been a Black Panther and had been associated with the MOVE organization, while the victim had been a police officer. Both the Supreme Court and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals have held that such issues can contribute to making a prima facie case of discrimination, yet neither was considered by the three-judge panel in its ruling in this case. Bryan also noted that at the time of the trial, there was no Batson standard to raise an objection to (the US Supreme Court’s Batson standard was established in 1986, but was made retroactive for all cases). Indeed, in 1982, at the time of Abu-Jamal’s trial, it was technically legal for prosecutors to reject jurors on the basis of race, so he and his trial attorney would have been making a pointless objection at trial had they formally complained back then.
All these points, Bryan argues in his petition for a re-consideration of his client's Batson claim, were also powerfully made in a dissent by the third appellate judge, Thomas Ambro (a Clinton appointee), who charged that his two senior colleagues on the bench were making “a newly created contemporaneous objection rule for habeas petitions,” which he warned would conflict with all the court's prior decisions.
Judge Ambro, Bryan points out, also was dismissive in his dissent of his two colleagues’ claim that they needed to know the composition of the jury pool before they could say the prosecutor’s dismissal of two thirds of the qualified black jurors might constitute improper discrimination in jury selection. “It is my belief,” he wrote, “that this strike rate without reference to total venire (jury pool) can stand on its own for the purpose of raising an inference of discrimination.”
In any event, Bryan went on to demonstrate, using the trial transcript record and some simple math, that in fact the racial composition of the original jury pool can be established: it was 14 blacks and 31 whites, or in other words, 31 percent black. Since it has been stipulated by the district attorney’s office, and accepted as fact by the state courts, that the prosecutor used his ability to dismiss jurors peremptorily (without cause) to eliminate 10 black jurors already considered acceptable by the court, that gives the prosecution a strike rate of 66.67 percent, or more than double the actual percentage of available black jurors in the pool. Admittedly it would have been better had the defense been able to make that damning point at the Third Circuit hearing last year, when the two Republican judges on the bench were demanding it, properly or not. That said, it is still a point that the full Third Circuit bench should consider carefully, in examining lst year's bizarre ruling by the three-judge panel of Scirica, Cowen and Ambro.
' The challenge faced by Abu-Jamal in this bid for a reconsideration of his Batson claim ruling is that the three judges who already ruled, including Judge Cowen, could be part of any en banc reconsideration. Judge Marjorie Rendell, one of the 12 active members of the Third Circuit, has recused herself from the hearing because her husband, Gov. Ed Rendell, was district attorney and as such was boss of the prosecutor, Joe McGill, when the case was tried. Another judge, Clinton appointee Theodore McKee, also recused himself, as did Bush appointee D. Michael Fisher. Ordinarily, en banc deliberations are limited to active judges, but Judge Cowen, though retired, might be able to participate, since he was one of the judges who issued the ruling in question. If Judge Cowan did not participate in an en banc session, that would mean four additional judges would have to side with Judge Ambro, for a reversal and an order for a hearing on Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim. If Cowan were to join the bench, however, that would mean a total of 10 judges, and thus a majority of six--or five in addition to Ambro--would be needed for a reversal.
Without Cowan, the odds would be daunting enough. Even if the other two Clinton appointees to the Third Circuit Court and one remaining Carter appointee were to side with Ambro, Abu-Jamal would need one Bush appointee to come over to get five votes for a reversal. With Cowan voting, five votes would just give a tie, leaving last year’s ruling standing. For a reversal, a second Bush appointee would have to be swayed to Abu-Jamal’s side.
That is quite a hurdle. Then again, stranger things have happened: One of the key Third Circuit rulings establishing the precedent that it should be relatively easy for a death row prisoner to establish prima facie evidence of race-based jury selection (to which Judge Ambro referred when he said his colleagues were ignoring the precedents of their own circuit) and gain a full hearing of the evidence, was written by a recent member of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Samuel Alito. Alito, recall, left the Third Circuit when he was appointed last year to the Supreme Court by Bush.
Technically, what Abu-Jamal is seeking at this point is an order from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals for a full Batson hearing, at which all evidence could be presented, and the prosecution questioned, about the prevailing practice by the district attorney's office in 1982 of excluding blacks from juries in Philadelphia (academic research shows that under Rendell's direction, prosecutors struck blacks from capital-case juries 58 percent of the time, compared to only 22 percent for whites), the record of prosecutor Joe McGill (who records show struck black jurors from the capital cases he tried 74 percent of the time, vs. 25 percent of the time for whites), and about what actually happened during jury selection process at Abu-Jamal's own trial, when two-thirds of black jurors were struck by the prosecutor.
If a judge were to establish after such a hearing that there was a racial motive behind McGill's actions during jury selection, or during the removal of one seated black juror early in the trial, or that even one juror was removed for racial reasons, under Batson rules, it would result automatically in Abu-Jamal's getting a new trial before a new, fairly selected jury.
The Third Circuit drama over Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim plays out as evidence continues to mount that his trial was a sham and a travestry. Among these are new photographs showing: 1) police manipulation of the evidence at the crime scene, 2) a lack of any bullet holes in the sidewalk surrounding the spot where officer Faulkner was lying when he was allegedly shot by Abu-Jamal, and 3) no indication of a taxi cab parked where cab driver Robert Chobert, a key prosecution “eye-witness,” claimed he had been located during the shooting incident. Other credible witnesses are also surfacing with evidence that there was never a shouted out “confession” in Jefferson Hospital’s emergency room, and that witness Chobert was actually not a witness to the shooting, but was rather parked on another street, facing away from the incident.
The District Attorney’s office is expected to file a counter petition opposing an en banc review of last year's Third Circuit ruling.
....................................................................................
Authors Website: http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
Authors Bio: Dave Lindorff, a columnist for Counterpunch, is author of several recent books ("This Can't Be Happening! Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy" and "Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal"). His latest book, coauthored with Barbara Olshanshky, is "The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office (St. Martin's Press, May 2006). His writing is available at http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
Phila Inquirer: Abu-Jamal seeks new trial in Phila. officer's slaying
By Emilie Lounsberry, Inquirer Staff Writer
Pennsylvania death-row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal has asked a federal appeals court to reconsider the decision that denied him a new trial in the 1981 slaying of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner.
In late March, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit left intact Abu-Jamal's conviction but said a new jury should decide whether he deserved death or should be sentenced to life behind bars.
In court papers docketed today, Robert R. Bryan, the San Francisco lawyer representing Abu-Jamal with Widener University law professor Judith Ritter, asked the three-judge panel and the full Third Circuit court to take another look.
They contended that the panel should have ordered a hearing on Abu-Jamal's contention that prosecutors intentionally excluded blacks from his jury in violation of a later 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
They noted that one of the panel members, Judge Thomas Ambro, wanted a hearing held on that issue, and said the majority "has backed away from this Circuit's historical commitment to equal justice for all."
The three-judge panel affirmed the December 2001 ruling by U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr., who had thrown out the death sentence after concluding that the jury might have been confused by the trial judge's instructions and wording on the verdict form filled out when the jury decided on death.
Yohn found that the jury might have mistakenly believed it had to agree unanimously on any mitigating circumstances - factors that might have persuaded jurors to decide on a life sentence, rather than death.
Abu-Jamal, 54, has been on death row since his 1982 conviction in the killing of Faulkner, who was shot to death near 13th and Locust Streets early in the morning of Dec. 9, 1981.
While Abu-Jamal is appealing because he wants a new trial, the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office could ask the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate the death sentence. Assistant District Attorney Hugh Burns said last month that no decision had been made on whether to ask the high court to consider the matter.
Abu-Jamal has written books and given taped speeches from death row, and his case has been followed in many parts of the world.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld his conviction and death sentence in 1989, and also rejected three other appeals - including one earlier this year.
Pennsylvania death-row inmate Mumia Abu-Jamal has asked a federal appeals court to reconsider the decision that denied him a new trial in the 1981 slaying of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner.
In late March, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit left intact Abu-Jamal's conviction but said a new jury should decide whether he deserved death or should be sentenced to life behind bars.
In court papers docketed today, Robert R. Bryan, the San Francisco lawyer representing Abu-Jamal with Widener University law professor Judith Ritter, asked the three-judge panel and the full Third Circuit court to take another look.
They contended that the panel should have ordered a hearing on Abu-Jamal's contention that prosecutors intentionally excluded blacks from his jury in violation of a later 1986 U.S. Supreme Court decision.
They noted that one of the panel members, Judge Thomas Ambro, wanted a hearing held on that issue, and said the majority "has backed away from this Circuit's historical commitment to equal justice for all."
The three-judge panel affirmed the December 2001 ruling by U.S. District Judge William H. Yohn Jr., who had thrown out the death sentence after concluding that the jury might have been confused by the trial judge's instructions and wording on the verdict form filled out when the jury decided on death.
Yohn found that the jury might have mistakenly believed it had to agree unanimously on any mitigating circumstances - factors that might have persuaded jurors to decide on a life sentence, rather than death.
Abu-Jamal, 54, has been on death row since his 1982 conviction in the killing of Faulkner, who was shot to death near 13th and Locust Streets early in the morning of Dec. 9, 1981.
While Abu-Jamal is appealing because he wants a new trial, the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office could ask the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate the death sentence. Assistant District Attorney Hugh Burns said last month that no decision had been made on whether to ask the high court to consider the matter.
Abu-Jamal has written books and given taped speeches from death row, and his case has been followed in many parts of the world.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld his conviction and death sentence in 1989, and also rejected three other appeals - including one earlier this year.
Sunday, July 06, 2008
New Issue of Abu Jamal Newsletter!
Check out the latest issue of this great newsletter by Hans Bennet. This one's really a jam-packed edition with lots of incredible, informative articles.
http://www.abu-jamal-news.com/docs/ajn3.pdf
http://www.abu-jamal-news.com/docs/ajn3.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)