The trend has continued. Today, the Mollen Commission, the NYPD "party"in DC, the Rodney King case and hundreds of other local scandals have exposed the dark underside of police misconduct nationwide. Ironically, the most prominent of the "new breed" of journalists at whom Rizzo's outburst was directed is awaiting execution on Pennsylvania's Death Row, the victim--many believe--of a police frame-up.

Mumia Abu-Jamal began his journalism career with the Black Panther Party. The Panthers were the original “affirmative action” employer, and Mumia (then Wesley Cook) was Minister of Information for the Philadelphia chapter at age 15, writing for the national newspaper. A heady beginning for a West Philly kid. After the Panthers fell apart (helped by a stiff dose of FBI harassment) Mumia turned to broadcasting. He had the voice, the writing talent and the ambition, and by age 25, he was one of the top names in local radio, interviewing such luminaries as Jesse Jackson and the Pointer Sisters and winning a Peabody Award for his coverage of the Pope's visit. He was president of the Philadelphia Association of Black Journalists, called “one to watch” by Philadelphia magazine.

But Mumia was still a radical. The Philadelphia Inquirer called him “an eloquent activist not afraid to raise his voice,” and this fearlessness was to be his undoing. His vocal support of MOVE's uncompromising life-style lost him jobs at Black stations, and he was forced to moonlight to support his family. The mayor's outburst marked the beginning of a campaign of police harassment that included such subtleties as a cocked finger and a 'bang bang' from a smirking cop, and escalated to a late-night police beating of Mumia's brother on the street.

Mumia was driving a cab that night. It is undisputed that he intervened. It is undisputed that both he and officer Daniel Faulkner were shot, and that Faulkner died. What is in dispute is who killed Faulkner. Mumia says it was someone else, and several witnesses saw another shooter flee the scene. Mumia's legally registered .38 was never decisively linked to Faulkner's wounds.

Mumia's murder trial was a policeman's dream. Denied the right to represent himself, he was defended by a reluctant incompetent who was later disbarred (and who has since filed an affadavit in Mumia's support detailing his delinquencies). Mumia was prosecuted by a DA who was later reprimanded for withholding evidence in another trial. He was allowed only $150 to interview witnesses.

But best of all was the judge. A life member of the Fraternal Order of Police, branded as a "defendant's nightmare" by the Philadelphia Inquirer, Judge Albert F. Sabo has sentenced more men to die (31 to date, only two of them white) than any other sitting judge in America. A fellow judge once called his courtroom a "vacation for prosecutors" because of bias toward convictions.

Sabo wouldn't allow Mumia to defend himself because his dreadlocks made jurors "nervous." Kept in a holding cell, he read about his own trial in the newspapers. A Black juror was removed for violating sequestration, while a white juror was given an court escort to take a civil service exam; in the end all the Black jurors but one were removed. A policeman who filed two conflicting reports was never subpoenaed (he was "on vacation"). Mumia's Black Panther history was waved like a bloody flag: Had he said, "All power to the people?" Yes, he admitted, he had said that. Character witnesses like poet Sonia Sanchez were cross-examined about their "anti-police" writings and associations.

Thus with Judge Sabo's help, an award-winning radical journalist with no criminal record was portrayed as a police assassin lying in wait since age 15. After Mumia's conviction, Sabo instructed the jury: "You are not being asked to kill anybody" by imposing the death penalty, since the defendant will get "appeal after appeal after appeal." Such instruction, grounds for reversal since Caldwell vs. Mississippi, was allowed in Mumia's case.

Mumia's appeals have so far gone unanswered. After being on Death Row for thirteen years, he is now the target of a police-led smear campaign. Last year NPR's "All Things Considered" canceled a scheduled series of his commentaries after the Fraternal Order of Police objected. Mumia's book, LIVE FROM DEATH ROW, has been greeted with a boycott and a skywriter circling the publisher's Boston offices: "Addison-Wesley Supports Cop Killers" Officer Faulkner's widow has gone on TV claiming that Mumia smiled at her when her husband's bloody shirt was shown--even though the record shows that Mumia wasn't in the courtroom that day.

Mumia and his supporters want only one thing--a new trial, with an unbiased judge and a competent lawyer. Defense attorney Leonard Weinglass has entered a motion to have Judge Sabo removed from the case because he cannot provide even the "appearance of fairness." The struggle became a race against time last month, when Pennsylvania Governor Ridge, though fully aware of the many questions in the case, signed a death warrant scheduling Mumia for execution August 17.

Mumia Abu-Jamal was not surprised. Several of the essays in his book deal with America's frantic "march toward the death chamber." As he wrote several years ago in the Yale Law Journal, "states that have not slain in a generation now ready their machinery: generators whine, poison liquids are mixed, and gases are measured and readied."

Unless Mumia Abu Jamal's final petition is answered, and he gets the fair trial he deserves, America will see its the first explicitly political execution since the Rosenbergs were put to death in 1953. Frank Rizzo's angry threat will be fulfilled, for one "new breed" journalist at least. It will stop. We won't hear any more criticism of the police from Mumia Abu-Jamal. Forever.

The impact of the Effective Death Penalty Act on Mumia's case

Although Mumia's attorneys are struggling heroically through legal means to win him a new trial, new repressive laws make it virtually impossible for death row inmates to win appeals. This is why Mumia's attorneys are urging the people's movement to raise the level of activity to free him. With the impending federal Habeas Corpus appeal, Mumia Abu-Jamal's supporters are now hoping that justice might finally be served in the federal courts. Since 1978, federal judges have been responsible for reversing 40% of all death sentences in the United States. These numbers are enticing, especially given the lack of justice, the appalling record on race, and the mistreatment of Mumia Abu-Jamal in the racist Pennsylvania state courts. Federal judges exist outside of the "old boy network" of the Pennsylvania courts and are not beholden to outside influences in the same way that the state judges are. With all of this in mind it could be easy to become complacent in our own endeavors to see Mumia freed, and optimistic in the federal court's role in the administration of justice. It cannot be emphasized enough however, that these attitudes are dangerous and could mean death for Mumia if we allow them to go unchallenged. The idea that justice can be found in the federal courts, especially in relation to capital cases, comes from a time now past. The federal appeals process in the last several years has undergone an attack by the pro-death penalty forces whose goal is to see an increased number of executions in a shorter period of time. The erosion of the appeals process can be traced to April, 1996 when Congress passed into law the "Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (EDPA)" in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing. Although heralded as an attempt to battle domestic terrorism by giving the government, courts and police authorities expanded powers of repression, one of the central elements of the law was a measure calling for historic restrictions on habeas corpus - the rights of prisoners to appeal their convictions and sentences in federal courts. Although advocates for this law attempted to characterize the restrictions as mere reforms, in reality habeas corpus was gutted along with the ability of federal judges to overturn the death sentences handed down by the state courts. Historically, habeas corpus protections emerged from the period of reconstruction following the Civil War. The Habeas Corpus Act of 1867 was designed to give newly freed African Americans federal protection from states that would use the criminal justice system to manipulate and coerce them back to the plantations they had left behind. These protections have played an important role over the past decade, and have allowed many inmates falsely sentenced to death to establish their innocence, or illustrate violations of their constitutional rights. History is chock full of examples of citizens who have been falsely sentenced to death. On October 21, 1993, The Dallas Morning News published an article on the House Subcommittee's report that Texas and 16 other states were condemning innocent men to death. The report listed five Texas inmates who had been wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death. "Randell Dale Adams was wrongfully convicted for killing a police officer in Dallas, but he was released in 1989 when documents were discovered that proved prosecutors withheld favorable evidence. Clarence Brandley was wrongfully convicted of killing a white teenager in Conroe. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed his conviction after it was discovered the Texas Rangers instructed the witnesses to commit perjury." Years later another man confessed to murdering the teenager. "Vernon McManus was convicted [of] Murder-for-hire. He was released after it was discovered that his trial attorney was dating Mrs. McManus during the trial and subsequently married [her]... John Skelton was released in 1990 when the Court of Criminal Appeals found the evidence was insufficient to prove the case against him." (Jerry Lee Hogue, http://www.lampofhope.org/tdrj7k.html) The report cited racial prejudice, official misconduct, withholding favorable evidence, shoddy legal representation, inadequate post-trial review of innocent claims, and the politicization of the clemency process as factors associated with wrongful convictions. The report went on to state that ".a substantial number of death row prisoners are indeed innocent." The EDPA altered the federal appeals process in several ways. First, it limited the time in which death row inmates have to file their petitions in the federal courts to 180 days after the finality of their state sentences. Because it often takes years to put together a successful appeal, this new law creates a situation in which the wrongfully convicted are put to death without an opportunity to sufficiently investigate or collect the necessary evidence to prove their innocence. In the case of Andrew Mitchell, it took attorneys 11 years to collect the evidence that proved Mitchell's innocence. It took the attorneys for Clarence Brandley 9 years to prove his innocence. If the EDPA had existed then Mitchell and Brandley would both be dead. The EDPA also requires the federal courts to assume that findings of fact by the state courts are true. This is the most dangerous element of the EDPA in relation to Mumia's case. In his state court proceedings ruled over by Judge Albert Sabo, Mumia was barred from presenting significant evidence of police and prosecutorial misconduct, of eyewitness testimony, and of forensic evidence. This evidence is absolutely crucial in proving Mumia's innocence, as well as in illustrating the FOP and Philadelphia conspiracy to see Mumia put to death. While federal courts in the past were able to consider the evidence of a case while evaluating an appeal, under the EDPA they are not supposed to look at the evidence and are to assume that the state court's findings are true. In order for a federal court to question the "presumed correctness" of a state court, the defendant must now "rebut the presumption of correctness by clear and convincing evidence." Clear and convincing evidence places the burden of proof on the defendant. For Mumia to be granted a hearing on the state court's denial of his rights, he must now essentially prove his innocence first. The EDPA limits defendants to no more than one review by a federal court, and requires the lower federal court to grant a "certificate of appealability" before the defendant can appeal to a higher federal court. This is designed to rush death row inmates through the appeals process and into the execution chamber. The habeas corpus "reforms" brought about by the Effective Death Penalty Act are currently being challenged in the Supreme Court by Bobby Joe Williams, a death row inmate. The case was argued on October 4, 1999. Although it is hard to predict when the Supreme Court will issue its decision on this case, it is expected to be before the end of the year and is sure to have a profound effect on Mumia's case. His attorneys have stated that they are hopeful by virtue of the questions that were asked by several of the justices, including Justice Ginsberg and Justice Kennedy that the Supreme Court has taken a dim view of the arguments that were proffered to eviscerate the protections of federal habeas corpus. Should the Supreme Court uphold the EDPA habeas "reforms", then it seems unlikely that Mumia will find justice in the federal courts. Such a decision would render federal court appeals virtually moot. The conspiracy to execute Mumia Abu-Jamal is of such a large scale, that to place our hope for his release in the same corrupt, racist, political machine that has held him captive for eighteen years is to sentence him to death. The Fraternal Order of Police has extended their hand into every pocket and are working overtime to silence Mumia's voice, to keep the truth from coming out, and overall to ensure that Mumia does not survive. The FOP has been at the center of Mumia's case from the beginning, and continues to drive Mumia towards the death chamber at an alarming speed. The police officers that fabricated Mumia's confession were tied to the FOP. The officers who intimidated, threatened and coerced witnesses to remain silent or give false testimony were associated with the FOP. Judge Sabo, who presided over nearly all of Mumia's state court appearances, was a member of the FOP. Five out of seven of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices who denied a new trial for Mumia in the state courts had been endorsed by the FOP in their campaigns for positions in the high court. In a November 10, 1999 article that appeared in the Village Voice, it is reported that the Pennsylvania state senate rejected a moratorium on executions in Pennsylvania. Even more striking was the senate's refusal to order a study of whether the death penalty was being administered fairly. This is particularly shocking given the fact that it occurred in a state where both the Philadelphia and Pennsylvania Bar Associations have called for moratoriums on capital punishment until such a time as it can be "administered in a fair and impartial manner." The Pennsylvania Bar Association noted that "Pennsylvania Department of Corrections statistics raise a serious concern that people of color and men are sentenced to death at a rate which substantially exceeds the rate at which Caucasians and women are sentenced to death." The Village Voice went on to report that five abolitionists went to meet with Joseph Loeper, the senate's Republican Majority Leader to gather more information about the Republican-led defeat of the amendment. When questioned about his vote, the Reverend Jeffrey Garis, a minister in the Brethren in Christ Church, quoted Loeper as saying, "The second factor was Mumia. Governor Ridge had just signed a warrant for him, and his case is a significant issue for many of us in the suburbs of Philadelphia." "Loeper's remarks unnerved Garis, who had observed a large plaque festooning a wall in the senator's office. It was a commendation from the Fraternal Order of Police." (Village Voice) As a movement, we must be clear that these are the forces working against us, controlling the media, and undermining our efforts. Without a broad, large scale people's campaign Mumia will never find justice in the courts and will never be freed. We must continue to organize, demonstrate, and raise our voices in anger over the injustice that Mumia has faced. If we allow them to execute our brother, friend and ally it will have far-reaching ramifications that will effect all of us, and every issue that we fight for. It will reinforce, and cement what we already know: that truth has no place in this country, that justice does not exist, and through repression, tyranny and violence the state will attempt to ignore and silence our voices. Mumia has always fought for the oppressed, the powerless, and the voiceless. He is on death row for all of us. Those of us on the outside must be there for him as well. We cannot let them kill Mumia Abu-Jamal!!!

Issued by National People's Campaign.
West Coast: 2489 Mission St., Room 28, San Francisco, CA 94110 (415) 821-6545
web: www.actionsf.org
email: npc@actionsf.org
Seattle: 1218 E. Cherry St., Seattle 98122 (206) 325-0085 Research & analysis by Josh Trentor

The following pledge is being circulated by Refuse & Resist!

Stop The Execution!
A Pledge of Conscience

Revolutionary Worker #964, July 5, 1998

This is a new pledge of support for Mumia developed by Refuse & Resist together with the International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal. The pledge allows the widest range of people to express their determination to oppose the government's attempt to execute Mumia.

It is intended to be used by everyone working on the campaign as a regular part of our on-going work. It can be distributed at programs, through mailings, and printed in publications. Groups distributing the pledge can use it to develop local mailing lists and emergency response networks, but the information collected should be forwarded to the Family & Friends in Philadelphia.

---

Mumia Abu-Jamal is still on death row. His fate, and the cause of justice itself, depend on us.

A decision in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal is coming soon from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The chances are great that he will be denied a new trial, and the governor of Pennsylvania has promised to sign a new death warrant immediately. Although a federal appeal will stay that execution date, a new death warrant would be a major turning point in Mumia's case. It would signal that a political decision has been made to push ahead with Mumia's execution. A stay is nothing but a temporary postponement.

The trial that put Mumia on death row was a legal travesty. Because of the circumstances surrounding his conviction and sentencing, his case has become a touchstone internationally and in the U.S. Therefore:

In face of the threat of a new death warrant, I pledge to speak out for a new trial and to prevent the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal.

In the event of a new death warrant, I pledge further that I will devote whatever effort is needed to prevent the first execution of a political dissident in the U.S. in over 45 years.

The whole world is watching.
I will not stand by in silence.

---

Why YOU Should Sign the Pledge

In 1995 Mumia Abu-Jamal was only 10 days away from execution when massive worldwide protest forced the government to grant a temporary stay of execution. Today, he awaits one last decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. If they decide against him, a death warrant will be signed. After this, his case will go to federal court. In today's climate of "rush to the death penalty," no one can predict how quickly and on what terms his case will be decided.

Mumia's original trial was a travesty. He was denied the right to act as his own counsel. His court-appointed attorney was so incompetent he was later disbarred. Witnesses who could give testimony supporting Mumia's innocence were coerced and suppressed. Hundreds of Philadelphia cases have been overturned in recent years based on federal charges of corruption and documented official lying by the Philadelphia police department. Even if one were to fully accept the police version of the facts, it would not have been a first degree murder/death penalty case. It came to be so only through political motivations, evidenced by the prosecutor arguing for the death penalty by reading revolutionary quotes from Mumia's writings ten years earlier.

Indeed, Mumia's case cannot be separated from who he is and what he represents. As a high school student, he was a founding member of the Black Panther Party in Philadelphia. Mumia's FBI file begins at age 15. Later, as a prominent radio journalist, he developed a style of radio journalism that put the voices of the inner city onto the airwaves. He exposed a corrupt Philadelphia police department, and its war against the MOVE organization, and thus became a police target himself--charged with the murder of a police officer, which many eyewitnesses testified he did not commit.

For these reasons, many have come to oppose Mumia's execution, and join the fight for a new trial.

"If you look today at the movement to save Mumia Abu-Jamal's life, what do you find? You find there are many people who believe that he is totally and completely innocent, that he is in prison because he is an ex-Black Panther, because he is a MOVE supporter, because of the racism of this country. There are plenty of people who believe just that. But there are others who know about what went on in Judge Sabo's courtroom. And they look at how unfair that trial was, and they know about how the police pressured the witnesses against Mumia and they know as time has gone on how almost all of those witnesses have recanted. And they look at a trial like that and they say, we don't know whether he is guilty or innocent but we know that was an unfair trial and a trial that is so unfair can't prove anything. You shouldn't even take someone's drivers license away in a trial like that, let alone put him on death row. And then there are those who simply say the death penalty is wrong and that this killing has got to stop."

Robert Meeropol, son of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg

The case of Mumia Abu-Jamal has become a touchstone in society. It has come to concentrate a whole political atmosphere of blame and punishment aimed at society's most oppressed--criminalization of Black men, suppression of dissent, expanded death penalty, and the gutting of defendant's rights.

---

This article is posted in English and Spanish on Revolutionary Worker Online
http://www.mcs.net/~rwor
Write: Box 3486, Merchandise Mart, Chicago, IL 60654
Phone: 773-227-4066 Fax: 773-227-4497
(The RW Online does not currently communicate via email.)