The intense mobilizing efforts of Mumia Abu-Jamal’s supporters broke through the media blockade that has helped deny the African American political prisoner his freedom. Supporters intervened on NBC’s Today Show on Dec. 6 and then in a Philadelphia radio talk show.
Abu-Jamal is on death row, falsely convicted of murder of a police officer, Daniel Faulkner, in Philadelphia on Dec. 9,
|
From Paris to New York City, a movement has grown worldwide to demand his freedom. Thanks to that support, Abu-Jamal’s prospects for freedom are looking up.
The trial against Abu-Jamal was full of violations: police intimidation of witnesses and falsification of evidence; jury selection involving racial bias; false police testimony; prosecutorial and court misconduct; inadequate legal defense; and prosecution in a city where historically the police have terrorized the African American community. Some of these issues are now on appeal and awaiting a court decision.
On the Dec. 6 Today Show, Faulkner’s widow, Maureen Faulkner, spoke to promote her book, “Murdered by Mumia”—co-authored by rightwing Philadelphia talk-show radio host Michael Smerconish. The show’s co-host Matt Lauer asked her and Smerconish a question about newly-revealed evidence which indicates likely police manipulation of the crime scene.
That question did not arise out of NBC’s concern for the truth and justice. It happened because Abu-Jamal’s supporters organized a press conference and letter-writing campaign demanding equal time for Abu-Jamal.
Although equal time was not granted, the question of newly-discovered photographic evidence—evidence that could be crucial to Abu-Jamal’s legal defense—was brought forth by Today Show’s Lauer.
That evidence is photographs taken of the crime scene on Dec. 9, 1981, by photojournalist Pedro Polakoff before police arrived on the night that Faulkner was killed on a Philadelphia sidewalk. The photographs, 26 in total, clearly show that evidence was contaminated by police handling. (Visit http://www.abu-jamal-news.com/ to view the photos by Polakoff)
Later, on WHYY, a Philadelphia talk show, with Maureen Faulkner promoting her book, she was again asked about the evidence contamination. The reporter quoted from a Reuters news agency. The Reuters story came about by the media work of Abu-Jamal’s supporters.
Possibility of court victory
Until recently, Abu-Jamal’s appeals on more than 20 constitutional violations that occurred during his trial were denied a hearing in Pennsylvania and federal courts. Those denials were largely due to the infamous law signed by then-president Bill Clinton that eviscerated death-penalty defendants’ habeas corpus rights to appeal. That law is known as the “Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.”
Yet, the support movement for Abu-Jamal, plus the growing public sentiment against state executions, has helped bring critical issues in Abu-Jamal’s case—issues previously denied—before the appeals court.
Now there is renewed hope that Abu-Jamal may win justice and his freedom.
The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia heard oral arguments on Abu-Jamal’s case on May 17, 2007. The subject was defense claims of several constitutional violations of Abu-Jamal’s rights. A decision is pending on those appeals; it could come at any time.
Among the issues on appeal is the unconstitutional removal of 11 African American prospective jurors during Abu-Jamal’s 1982 trial, by the prosecutor Joseph McGill, due to his racist bias. The basis of this constitutional violation is a Supreme Court decision known as “Batson,” which prohibits racial bias in jury selection.
Another issue on appeal was the statement of trial judge Albert Sabo, who was heard by court stenographer Terri Maurer Carter saying that he would “help them fry the n****r.” Abu-Jamal’s attorneys have tried for years to have this key issue heard on appeals. But in one of the appeals, in 2001, Pennsylvania’s Common Pleas Judge Pamela Dembe ruled it irrelevant. However, it was argued before the 3rd Circuit in May.
These violations plus the blatantly unconstitutional statements by prosecutor McGill, make it a significant possibility that Abu-Jamal’s conviction could be overturned and a new trial ordered.
In his closing arguments at Abu-Jamal’s trial, McGill told the jurors they did not have to worry about convicting Abu-Jamal even if they did not believe he was guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt” because, in his words, there would be “appeal after appeal” and their verdict could change. That statement served to lessen each juror’s responsibility and burden of deciding the verdict beyond a reasonable doubt. It also contributed to the climate of hostility against a Black defendant accused of killing a white policeman.
The Philadelphia district attorney’s office has a counter-appeal before the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals against a 2001 decision by federal judge William Yohn throwing out Abu-Jamal’s death sentence. Yohn ruled that the jury’s decision to recommend the death penalty was tainted by improper instructions to the jury by Sabo.
Robert Bryan, long-time death-row appeals attorney and Abu-Jamal’s current counsel, said recently, “If the court follows the law and the U.S. Constitution, we will win. In my experience of successfully litigating well over a hundred capital murder cases at trial and on appeal, I know that courts are not always just. They can make terribly tragic mistakes.
“Nevertheless, I have not seen a case more riddled with such significant constitutional violations, racism, fraud, and unfairness. My goal remains to achieve a reversal of the conviction, and at a new jury trial win a jury acquittal so that Mumia can go home to his family—a free person.”
In the meantime, his supporters continue their organizing efforts, fully aware that political prisoners like Abu-Jamal can only win justice by the people’s struggle.
Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!
