Pennsylvania Supreme Court Upholds Verdict
Massive Protests Needed to Win a New Trial for Mumia
* USA
Abu-Jamal
by Steve Bloom The October 29 ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, turning down Mumia Abu-Jamal's appeal for a new trial, is one more proof that the U.S. criminal court system has very little interest in justice.
Justice, at the very least, demands a new trial in this case. The seven judges of Pennsylvania's highest court, however, have clearly demonstrated that they are simply one more cog in a government machine of death which is determined to take Mumia's life-not because he is guilty of any crime, but because he is Black and militantly opposed to the oppression of poor and working people, especially people of color.
The court's opinion was unanimous. It was, notably, even joined by one Justice-Ronald Castille—who worked in the Philadelphia District Attorney's office before he was elected to his present position. And while he was a prosecutor Castille signed the papers filed against Mumia's original appeal.
Despite this clear conflict of interest Castille refused to recuse (remove) himself from the case. Mumia's attorneys also noted that, in his bid for election to the court in 1993, Castille was endorsed incriminate Mumia, and suppressed evidence that would exonerate him. And the jury was manipulated to exclude Blacks.
A recent study of ten years of the death penalty in Pennsylvania found that in capital cases Black jurors were five times more likely than white jurors to be excused. In Mumia's trial, however, the figure was: 16.5 times more likely.
In addition Mumia had one more strike against him as far as the courts and police were concerned. He is a former Black Panther and an award-winning journalist who consistently (and effectively) attempted to expose police abuse and corruption in Philadelphia.
The trial was assigned to hanging judge Albert Sabo, who held the U.S. record for death sentences handed down. Sabo was once denounced by five assistant District Attorneys, who issued a statement explaining that it was impossible for any defendant to get a fair trial in Judge Sabo's court.
Sabo also heard the initial phase of Mumia's latest appeal, during which he upheld every motion made by the prosecution while denying every one made by the defense. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, however, insisted that it could find no basis to conclude from this rather distinctive pattern (or from anything else that happened during the original trial or the appeal process) that there was any bias on the part of the judge. Judges in Wonderland
Mumia's case differs from that of most death-row inmates in one important respect. Over the years a substantial movement has developed to prevent his execution and to win a new trial.
His legal appeal has been taken on by a top team of attorneys headed by by the Philadelphia Fraternal Order of A Statement From Death Row Police (FOP)-which has campaigned in favor of Mumia's execution.
As Castille explained, "the FOP, which endorsed me during earlier i electoral processes, also endorsed Mr. Chief Justice John P. Flaherty, Mr. Justice Ralph Cappy, Mr. Justice Russell M. Nigro, and Madame Justice Sandra Schultz Newman. If the FOP's endorsement constituted a basis for recusal, practically the entire court would be required to decline participation in this appeal."
That remark tells the whole story. If Mumia Abu-Jamal is going to get any justice it is, clearly, going to have to be won in the streets. We cannot rely on the courts. The background
Mumia was convicted in 1982 for killing a Philadelphia police officer, Daniel Faulkner. The scenario that surrounded his trial is chillingly familiar to anyone who has studied the workings of the death penalty since it was reintroduced into the United States in 1976.
Mumia is Black. He was incompetently "defended" by a court-appointed attorney. The police intimidated witnesses, manufactured evidence that would 8 International Viewpoint #308 February 1999
Once again, Pennsylvania's highest court has shown us the best justice that the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) can buy. Ignoring right reason, their own precedent, and fundamental justice, they have returned to the stranglehold of death.
In their echoes of the tortured logic of Judge Albert Sabo, they have reflected a. striking fidelity to the DA's office. If it is fair to have a tribunal who are in part admittedly paid by the FOP-and at least one justice who can double as DA one day and a judge the next in the same case-then fairness is just as empty a word as "justice." To paraphrase Judge Sabo, it is "just an emotional feeling."
In recent months the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has upheld death sentences in cases where an impartial reading of transcripts or pleadings would make an honest affirmation all but impossible. They have ignored all evidence of innocence, overlooked clear instances of jury taint, and cast a dead eye on defense attorneys' ineffectiveness. What they have done in my case is par for the course. This is a political decision, paid for by the FOP on the eve of the election. It is a Mischief Night gift from a court that has a talent for the macabre.
1am sorry that this court did not rule on the right side of history. But I am not surprised. Every time our nation has come to a fork in the road with regard to race, it has chosen to take the path of compromise and betrayal. On 29 October 1998, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court committed a collective crime: it damned due process, strangled the fair trial, and raped justice.
Even after this legal legerdemain [sleight of hand] I remain innocent. A court cannot make an innocent man guilty. Any ruling founded on injustice is not justice. The righteous fight for life, liberty, and for justice can only continue. *
Mumia Abu-Jamal, SCI-Greene, Waynesburg, PA October 31st, 1998
Leonard Weinglass. As a result of the work done in preparation for this appeal, the absurd miscarriage of justice that passed for a trial in 1982 is now well documented. The facts are easily accessible to anyone who cares to delve into the matter—in print, through the Internet, on video, ete.—and all of this sordid history was spelled out in the legal papers placed before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
A portion of this record is documented in the text of the New York Times advert reproduced in the box on page 11. But this only begins to scratch the surface of problems with the original trial. For example, there were three government "eye-witnesses" who supported one or another aspect of the case against Mumia. But their testimony is
Another witness who was called by the defense at the trial, Veronica Jones, now says explicitly that she lied in court because the police had threatened her if she refused to do so. This should cast some doubt on the credibility of the others who testified. But it is not the only reason to be sceptical.
In an unrelated recent case a woman by the name of Pamela Jenkins appeared as the star government witness in a trial against six police officers from Philadelphia's 39th District who were convicted on charges of gross misconduct. In a statement signed for Mumia's attorneys Jenkins explained that one of the convicted officers, Tom Ryan, had tried to compel her to give false testimony against Mumia in the original trial.
She further said that during this same period Cynthia White-the only one to testify in court that she actually saw Mumia fire his gun at Officer Faulknerhad told her that she [Cynthia] was afraid of the police and that the police were trying to get her to say something about the shooting." Apparently they suc-
Despite all of this, the judges of the Pennsylvania Supreme court found against Mumia's appeal on every single point of fact and of law. They concluded—as Sabo did-that all of the testimony in the original trial remains credible, and that all of the witnesses who have since come forward to say that they were coerced by the police are not telling the truth.
The judges chose to accept at face value the tale of two officers who failed to say anything about Mumia's alleged hospital-bed "confession"-one of whom even wrote in his notebook that Mumia said nothing at all the night of his arrest-and then suddenly "remembered" this vital evidence two months later.
They disregard the note in the medical examiner's report (never introduced at the trial because the defense was never informed that it existed) which indicates the fatal bullet could not have come from Mumia's gun. There is forensic evidence which proves that the bullet which wounded Mumia could not have been fired from the positions Faulkner and Mumia were in according to the state's own account of events, and that Mumia could not have been as close to Faulkner as is alleged when he is supposed to have fired the first shot.
None of this was brought out before the jury because the defense was provided no money by the court to hire a forensic expert of its own.
Indeed we find ourselves in a legal Wonderland: Verdict first, evidence later—as far as the honorable judges of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court are concerned. For anyone else there should, at the very least, be a question of reasonFederal appeals
Mumia's next step will be an appeal to the Federal courts. But this is now much more difficult for death-row prisoners. In 1996, during the antiYou can help!
Two major actions have been called to mobilize support from those who want to help win a new trial for Mumia Abu-
• Conferences in Philadelphia,
New York, Chicago San Francisco, and other cities in January and
• Mass demonstrations in Philadelphia and San Francisco on April 24
(Mumia's birthday).
For further information contact International Concerned
Family and Friends of Mumia Abu Jamal, P.O, Box
19709, Philadelphia, PA 19143; Phone: 215-476-8812,
Fax: 215-476-7511; Email: mumia@aol.com; website:
Send protest messages to:
• Governor Tom Ridge, Main
Capitol Building, Rm 225,
Harrisburg, PA 17120
• Chief Justice P. Flaherty, Supreme
Court of PA, Six Gateway Center,
Suite 6161, 11 Stanwix St.,
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Demand a new trial for Mumia
Abu-Jamal and that no execution take place until after a new trial is
• Send a message to Attorney
General Janet Reno, 950 Pennsyl-
Washington, DC 20530. Protest the violations of Mumia's civil rights during the legal proceedings in his case and demand an independent federal civil rights investiation.
• Send donations for Mumia's legal defense to: "Black United Fund/
Mumia Abu-Jamal." In the memo field write "legal defense" and mail to: Black United Fund, 2227
N. Broad St., Philadelphia, PA
19132-4502.
terrorist hysteria that followed the Oklahoma City bombing, Congress passed the "Effective Death Penalty Act.
Before that law federal judges undertook an independent revie of the facts of any death-penalty case which came before them. but according to the new law the federal courts must accept the facts of Mumia's case-and any other death-penalty case-as determined by
So all of the Wonderland interpretations of Judge Sabo, now upheld by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, will, if this law is applied, be taken as established fact when the appeal comes before the federal courts. This puts an enormous possibly even impossible-burden of proof on the defense to justify federal
There is, in addition, a bizarre legal formulation in the new law which requires the federal courts to accept determinations of law by the state courts even if these interpretations violate the federal constitution-so long as they are not found to be "unreasonably wrong.
Almost any legal ruling can conceivably be accepted under such a formula, a fact which-according to the National Association of Defense Lawyers"creates arbitrary and virtually insurmountable obstacles for prisoners.
Of course, legal grounds for appeal the question of whether the "Effective Death Penalty Act" itself, with its restrictions on federal appeals, is constitutional. But the legal effort will certainly be an uphill struggle A broad-based movement
The unanimity of the verdict by the Pennsylvania court, even more than the fact of that verdict, should be taken as an indication that this case is going to be won or lost primarily on a political battlefield, not on a legal one. The ruling powers would seem to have made a clear decision that they want to drive ahead with Mumia's execution no matter what the facts may be. And federal court intervention, as we have seen, cannot be
For social activists this case should take on a status similar to that of some landmark historical struggles carried out to stop the executions of people like Joe Hill (Utah 1915), Sacco and Vanzetti (Massachusetts 1927), and Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (federal, 1953).
It is somewhat chilling to remember that in each of these cases, despite massive world-wide campaigns of protest, the government went ahead and carried out its legal murder anyway.
Today the movement to save the life of Mumia Abu-Jamal is far weaker than in any of these previous situations. That should give us a sense of what we are up against. If we are going to save the life of Mumia Abu-Jamal then there is substan-
International Viewpoint #308 February 1999 9
* USA
And yet the facts of this case are so blatant, the case for reasonable doubt so clear, that it gives our side a definite advantage if we are capable of utilizing those facts effectively. The task is to get out the truth to the broadest possible audience-far broader than the relatively small circles of committed radicals and revolutionaries who have so far been the most visible in rallying to Mumia's defense. We have to reach out to unions, church groups, college and high-school students, and others in the "mainstream"
Immediately after the Pennsylvania court's decision emergency protests were held. During the first week of November demonstrations in cities across the country turned out hundreds of activists in several major cities, and smaller
On 7 November 1998 regional mobilizations took place-with 1,000 participants in Philadelphia and 2,500 in San Francisco, along with smaller actions in other places. So there is a good base of supporters already involved who can begin to do the needed work.
The forces coordinating the national defense effort have now called for major conferences in Philadelphia, Chicago, and California at the end of January and beginning of February, plus mobilizations for Mumia's birthday, April 24, in Philadelphia and San Francisco (see box on page 9). It will be important to take advantage of the opportunity these activities provide to substantially broaden the appeal of the movement.
But if we are going to succeed in reaching out beyond the already-committed core of activists we need to acknowledge that much of the "revolutionary" rhetoric which many have brought to actions around Mumia constitutes a selfcreated obstacle, one which makes it harder to talk to that broader audience.
It is essential to now focus quite consciously on trying to convince every person with even a modest commitment to justice and human rights in this country, most of whom do not consider themselves revolutionaries, that they have a personal stake in whether Mumia -lives or dies, and therefore in whether he gets a new trial.
This kind of approach by the movement to save Mumia's life would be, in the end, the most revolutionarybecause it could create the biggest potential problem for the U.S. ruling class.
If the State of Pennsylvania decides to drive ahead with this execution we will be in a position to expose the naked reality of class, and white supremacist, rule in the U.S.A. to hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions, who now have illusions in a system which (they have so often been told) guarantees "justice for all."
It is this potential, and only this potential for massive numbers to discover the real truth about racist justice in capitalist America which has any chance of forcing the State of Pennsylvania to hesitate in its legal murder campaign. All of our organizing strategies should be planned accordingly. *
A message from Death Row innocents
There are 75 documented cases in which death sentences have been overturned since 1976 when the death penalty was reinstated. Many of them came with days, even hours, of actually being executed before they were exonerated
During that same period almost 500 people have had their lives taken away. There is no statistic to tell us how many of that number were actually innocent.
The letter below was circulated during the November 1998 "National Conference on Wrongful Convictions & the Death Penalty." It is signed by 15 individuals who have faced this harrowing ordeal. "There are innocent men and women on death row in this country. We know, for we were numbered among them. Many of us endured for years in the narrow and isolated confines of a barren cell designed to murder our spirits, as the State struggled to win final legal sanction to steal our lives
Such is the case with Mumia Abu-Jamal, an award-winning journalist, an outspoken opponent of racism and police brutality, a militant champion of justice for Black people, a man who for decades has been the voice of the dispossessed and the disenfranchisedóand an innocent man on death row in Pennsylvania.
We know Mumia's struggle, because no-one knows better than 10. International Viewpoint #308 February 1999 we of the lengths to which the criminal "justice" system will go in its relentless quest to take a life
Many of us are intimately familiar with the daily degradation of Mumia's seventeen years on death row: locked in his cell for 23 hours each day, forbidden to embrace or even see his family members, prohibited from being filmed or audio taped by reporters, slapped into punitive detention for writing and publishing his views, and refused the right to confidentially communicate with his attorneys.
We were sustained in our struggle for justice, as Mumia is, by the tireless support of our families, friends, and people of principle who organized to liberate us from the machine that tried to slay us. And above all else we were sustained, as Mumia is, by the only real certainty we were allowed on death row -the knowledge that we were
The State sought to poison us, electrocute us or hang us with the machine-like indifference it reserves for people it has determined to be worthless and therefore disposable - in this country, overwhelmingly poor people and people of color. If our murders could be used to enhance a political career or a partisan policy debate, then so much the
But the State seeks to murder Mumia with a ruthless and relentless fervor that has publicly defied any pretext of fairness or decency. Let us be clear: the State's campaign to murder Mumia is designed above all else to silence a Black man who dares to speak truth to power. As Mumia himself has said, the State does not seek just his death, it seeks
It is for these reasons that we call on all people of conscience to speak out, to organize against this travesty of justice, and to demand Mumia's freedom. To allow Pennsylvania to murder Mumia is to allow the State to succeed in slaughtering another innocent and in silencing a
We know that the State will not concede its wrongdoing without a struggle. We know that the authorities who have sought to murder this man will not submit to justice unless we, the people, organize to fight the State's abuse of power. Join us. Stand with Mumia Abu-Jamal, our brother and our friend, and demand that the State of Pennsylvania set List Of Signatories: Kirk Bloodsworth: Maryland, Convicted 1984, Released 1993 • Joseph Burrows: Illinois, Convicted 1989, Released 1994 • Perry Cobb: Illinois, Convicted 1979, Released 1987 • Muneer Deeb: Texas, Convicted 1985, Released 1993 • Gary Gauger: Illinois, Convicted 1993, Released 1996 • Verneal Jimerson: Illinois, Convicted 1985, Released 1996 • Troy Lee Jones: California, Convicted 1982 Released 1996 • David Keaton: Florida, Convicted 1971, Released 1973 • Ronald Keine: New Mexico, Convicted 1974, Released 1976 • Carl Lawson: Illinois, Convicted 1990, Released 1996 • Wilbert Lee: Florida, Convicted 1963, Released 1975 • Bradley P. Scott: Florida, Convicted 1988, Released 1991 • Delbert Tibbs: Florida, Convicted 1974, Released 1977 • Darby (Williams) Tillis: Illinois, Convicted 1979, Released 1987 • Dennis Williams: Illinois, Convicted 1979, Released 1996
International support is crucial to save Mumia's life...
Mumia's case is probably better known outside the United States than at home.
President Nelson Mandela of South Africa, a former President of West Germany, and Belgium's Foreign Minister have spoken out for a new trial, along with 74 members of the Danish Parliament and 38 members of the Japanese Diet.
The European Parliament has passed a formal resolutions calling for a review of Mumia's conviction.
And on November 25, 1997, after a personal visit with Mumia, Pierre
Sane, Secretary General of Amnesty International, stated his fear that "Mumia Abu Jamal's original trial may have been contaminated by the deep-rooted racism that appears to taint the application of the death penalty in Pennsylvania."
This is a tribute to the massive international solidarity campaign. * But the Jury never heard the written
Facts About the Case [Taken from the text of a full-page advertisement published in The New York Times on 16 October 1998, two weeks before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court verdict. It was signed by scores of prominent individuals and organizations.]
"Award winning journalist and former Black Panther Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted in 1982 of killing a Philadelphia police officer, and was sentenced to death. Recent court hearings have raised very serious questions about his trial and the evidence used against him.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is now set to rule on the 26 issues raised in his appeal for a new trial. Throughout this process there has been an orchestrated campaign to obscure the facts and expedite his execution, including a recent fullpage advertisement in the New York Times. • Judge Albert Sabo has sentenced more people to death than any other sitting judge in the United States. Six former Philadelphia prosecutors have sworn in court documents that no accused could receive a fair trial in Sabo's court. • The Jury was impaneled only after eleven qualified African-Americans were removed by peremptory challenges from the prosecution, a practice that was recently revealed as having been taught to prosecutors in a special training video tape. • The Defense Attorney testified that he didn't interview a single witness in preparation for the 1982 trial and he informed the court in advance that he was not prepared. Jamal was also denied the right to act as his own attorney. • The Defense Investigator quit the case before the trial began because the meager court allocated funds were exhausted. Neither a ballistics expert or pathologist could be hired because of insufficient funds. • The Prosecutor used the fact that 12 years earlier Jamal had been a member of the Black Panther Party as an argument for imposing the death penalty, a practice later condemned as unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in another case. • The Racial Bias of Philadelphia's courts now has 120 people on death row—107 of them non-white. The question of "evidence" • The Prosecution claimed that Jamal loudly confessed at the hospital where he was taken after being shot by the slain officer and beaten But the Jury never heard from police officer Gary Wakshul who was guarding Jamal at the hospital and reported "the Negro male made no comments." When called as a defense witness, the prosecution contended that he was on vacation and unavailable. The judge refused a continuance so he could be brought in, when in fact he was home and available. Today we know that no police officers claimed to have heard this "confession" until two months after it allegedly occurred, and after Jamal had filed police brutality charges The attending physician also denies that Jamal said anything. • The Prosecution claimed that ballistics evidence proved that Jamal was
Findings of the Medical Examiner which contradicted other prosecution testimony by stating 44 cal" (Jamal's gun was .38 caliber) Jamal's court appointed attorney said he didn't see that portion of the report, so he never raised it. Today we know that the police never tested Jamal's gun to see if it had been recently fired, never tested Jamal's hands to see if he had fired a gun, have never shown Jamal's gun to be the fatal weapon, and have lost a bullet fragment removed by the medical examiner. • The Prosecution claimed that eyewitnesses identified Jamal as the But the Jury never head from a key eye-witness, William Singletary, who saw the whole incident and has testified that Jamal was not the Singletary, a local businessman, was harassed by police when reported this, and he subsequently fled the city. Today we know that the key witnesses Veronica Jones, Cynthia White, and Robert Chobert testified falsely in 1982, and we know why. • Jones, who now testifies in sup port of Jamal, was threatened with the loss of her children if she did not support the police story. • Chobert, a white cab driver, first told the arriving police that the shooter ran away. • White backed the whole police story, but none of the other witnesses can remember seeing her at • Both Chobert and White received very special treatment, including exemptions from criminal prosecu• By contrast, when Veronica Jones testified in Jamal's support, she was arrested in the courtroom.*
International Viewpoint #308 February 1999 11