Mumia Abu-Jamal Case: DA Dropping Death Penalty
gimmesometruth27
Posts: 23,303
interesting turn of events in this case. i feel sorry for the cop's wife and family, but they would most likely be waiting another decade before all of this is settled in the legal system. they can't re-try him, as witnesses have died in the last 30 years, and the circumstances in his trial were reported to be fishy.
i remember hearing about this case as a kid in middle and high school. and even moreso in college...
Mumia Abu-Jamal Case: DA Dropping Death Penalty Against Former Black Panther Convicted Of Shooting Philadelphia Cop
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/0 ... 33949.html
PHILADELPHIA -- Prosecutors on Wednesday abandoned their 30-year push to execute convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, the former Black Panther whose claim that he was the victim of a racist legal system made him an international cause celebre.
Abu-Jamal, 58, will instead spend the rest of his life in prison.
Flanked by police Officer Daniel Faulkner's widow, Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams announced his decision two days short of the 30th anniversary of the white patrolman's killing.
He said that continuing to seek the death penalty could lead to "an unknowable number of years" of appeals, and that some witnesses have died or are unavailable after nearly three decades.
"There's never been any doubt in my mind that Mumia Abu-Jamal shot and killed Officer Faulkner. I believe that the appropriate sentence was handed down by a jury of his peers in 1982," said Williams, the city's first black district attorney. "While Abu-Jamal will no longer be facing the death penalty, he will remain behind bars for the rest of his life, and that is where he belongs."
Abu-Jamal was originally sentenced to death. His murder conviction was upheld through years of appeals. But in 2008, a federal appeals court ordered a new sentencing hearing on the grounds that the instructions given to the jury were potentially misleading.
After the U.S. Supreme Court declined to weigh in two months ago, prosecutors were forced to decide whether to pursue the death penalty again or accept a life sentence without parole.
Williams said he reached the decision with the blessing of Faulkner's widow, Maureen.
"Another penalty proceeding would open the case to the repetition of the state appeals process and an unknowable number of years of federal review again, even if we were successful," the district attorney said.
Widener University law professor Judith Ritter, who represented Abu-Jamal in recent appeals, welcomed the move.
"There is no question that justice is served when a death sentence from a misinformed jury is overturned," Ritter said. "Thirty years later, the district attorney's decision not to seek a new death sentence also furthers the interests of justice."
According to trial testimony, Abu-Jamal saw his brother scuffle with the patrolman during a 4 a.m. traffic stop in 1981 and ran toward the scene. Police found Abu-Jamal wounded by a round from Faulkner's gun. Faulkner, shot several times, was killed. A .38-caliber revolver registered to Abu-Jamal was found at the scene with five spent shell casings.
Over the years, Abu-Jamal challenged the predominantly white makeup of the jury, the instructions given to the jurors and the accounts of eyewitnesses. He also complained that his lawyer was ineffective, that the judge was racist and that another man confessed to the crime.
His writings and radio broadcasts from death row put him at the center of an international debate over capital punishment and made him the subject of books and movies. The one-time journalist's own 1995 book, "Live From Death Row," depicts prison life and calls the justice system racist.
He garnered worldwide support from the "Free Mumia" movement, with hundreds of vocal supporters and death-penalty opponents regularly turning out for court hearings in his case.
His message resonated on college campuses and in Hollywood. Actors Mike Farrell and Tim Robbins were among dozens of luminaries who used a New York Times ad to call for a new trial, and the Beastie Boys played a concert to raise money for Abu-Jamal's defense.
Faulkner's widow labored to ensure her husband was not forgotten.
"My family and I have endured a three-decade ordeal at the hands of Mumia Abu-Jamal, his attorneys and his supporters, who in many cases never even took the time to educate themselves about the case before lending their names, giving their support and advocating for his freedom," she said Wednesday. "All of this has taken an unimaginable physical, emotional and financial toll on each of us."
Amnesty International, which maintains that Abu-Jamal's trial was "manifestly unfair and failed to meet international fair trial standards," said the district attorney's decision does not go far enough. Abu-Jamal still has an appeal pending before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court over the validity of ballistics evidence.
"Amnesty International continues to believe that justice would best be served by granting Mumia Abu-Jamal a new trial," said Laura Moye, director of the human rights group's Campaign to Abolish the Death Penalty.
Members of Philadelphia's police community stood with Williams and Maureen Faulkner as the decision was announced. Former police union president Rich Costello blasted the courts for ordering a new sentencing hearing.
"Where do Maureen and the Faulkner family go for a reduction in their sentence?" Costello said. "For 30 years now, they have been forced to suffer grief, anguish, abuse, insults, intimidation, threats and every other sort of indignity that can be visited on a family already in grief."
Faulkner lashed out at the judges who overturned the death sentence, calling them "dishonest cowards" who, she said, oppose the death penalty. The widow also vowed to fight any special treatment for Abu-Jamal behind bars, saying he should be moved to the general population after being taken off death row.
"I will not stand by and see him coddled, as he has been in the past," Faulkner said. "And I am heartened that he will be taken from the protective cloister he has been living in all these years and begin living among his own kind – the thugs and common criminals that infest our prisons."
i remember hearing about this case as a kid in middle and high school. and even moreso in college...
Mumia Abu-Jamal Case: DA Dropping Death Penalty Against Former Black Panther Convicted Of Shooting Philadelphia Cop
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/0 ... 33949.html
PHILADELPHIA -- Prosecutors on Wednesday abandoned their 30-year push to execute convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, the former Black Panther whose claim that he was the victim of a racist legal system made him an international cause celebre.
Abu-Jamal, 58, will instead spend the rest of his life in prison.
Flanked by police Officer Daniel Faulkner's widow, Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams announced his decision two days short of the 30th anniversary of the white patrolman's killing.
He said that continuing to seek the death penalty could lead to "an unknowable number of years" of appeals, and that some witnesses have died or are unavailable after nearly three decades.
"There's never been any doubt in my mind that Mumia Abu-Jamal shot and killed Officer Faulkner. I believe that the appropriate sentence was handed down by a jury of his peers in 1982," said Williams, the city's first black district attorney. "While Abu-Jamal will no longer be facing the death penalty, he will remain behind bars for the rest of his life, and that is where he belongs."
Abu-Jamal was originally sentenced to death. His murder conviction was upheld through years of appeals. But in 2008, a federal appeals court ordered a new sentencing hearing on the grounds that the instructions given to the jury were potentially misleading.
After the U.S. Supreme Court declined to weigh in two months ago, prosecutors were forced to decide whether to pursue the death penalty again or accept a life sentence without parole.
Williams said he reached the decision with the blessing of Faulkner's widow, Maureen.
"Another penalty proceeding would open the case to the repetition of the state appeals process and an unknowable number of years of federal review again, even if we were successful," the district attorney said.
Widener University law professor Judith Ritter, who represented Abu-Jamal in recent appeals, welcomed the move.
"There is no question that justice is served when a death sentence from a misinformed jury is overturned," Ritter said. "Thirty years later, the district attorney's decision not to seek a new death sentence also furthers the interests of justice."
According to trial testimony, Abu-Jamal saw his brother scuffle with the patrolman during a 4 a.m. traffic stop in 1981 and ran toward the scene. Police found Abu-Jamal wounded by a round from Faulkner's gun. Faulkner, shot several times, was killed. A .38-caliber revolver registered to Abu-Jamal was found at the scene with five spent shell casings.
Over the years, Abu-Jamal challenged the predominantly white makeup of the jury, the instructions given to the jurors and the accounts of eyewitnesses. He also complained that his lawyer was ineffective, that the judge was racist and that another man confessed to the crime.
His writings and radio broadcasts from death row put him at the center of an international debate over capital punishment and made him the subject of books and movies. The one-time journalist's own 1995 book, "Live From Death Row," depicts prison life and calls the justice system racist.
He garnered worldwide support from the "Free Mumia" movement, with hundreds of vocal supporters and death-penalty opponents regularly turning out for court hearings in his case.
His message resonated on college campuses and in Hollywood. Actors Mike Farrell and Tim Robbins were among dozens of luminaries who used a New York Times ad to call for a new trial, and the Beastie Boys played a concert to raise money for Abu-Jamal's defense.
Faulkner's widow labored to ensure her husband was not forgotten.
"My family and I have endured a three-decade ordeal at the hands of Mumia Abu-Jamal, his attorneys and his supporters, who in many cases never even took the time to educate themselves about the case before lending their names, giving their support and advocating for his freedom," she said Wednesday. "All of this has taken an unimaginable physical, emotional and financial toll on each of us."
Amnesty International, which maintains that Abu-Jamal's trial was "manifestly unfair and failed to meet international fair trial standards," said the district attorney's decision does not go far enough. Abu-Jamal still has an appeal pending before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court over the validity of ballistics evidence.
"Amnesty International continues to believe that justice would best be served by granting Mumia Abu-Jamal a new trial," said Laura Moye, director of the human rights group's Campaign to Abolish the Death Penalty.
Members of Philadelphia's police community stood with Williams and Maureen Faulkner as the decision was announced. Former police union president Rich Costello blasted the courts for ordering a new sentencing hearing.
"Where do Maureen and the Faulkner family go for a reduction in their sentence?" Costello said. "For 30 years now, they have been forced to suffer grief, anguish, abuse, insults, intimidation, threats and every other sort of indignity that can be visited on a family already in grief."
Faulkner lashed out at the judges who overturned the death sentence, calling them "dishonest cowards" who, she said, oppose the death penalty. The widow also vowed to fight any special treatment for Abu-Jamal behind bars, saying he should be moved to the general population after being taken off death row.
"I will not stand by and see him coddled, as he has been in the past," Faulkner said. "And I am heartened that he will be taken from the protective cloister he has been living in all these years and begin living among his own kind – the thugs and common criminals that infest our prisons."
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
This case was a poor model for real issues against the death penalty. But money is money no matter the source, so I don't think it mattered to him or his attorneys the real issue.
in some states life with possibility of parole is 40 years, in some it is 35, and life without parole is life in jail. he is not getting out.
just close the case and stop wasting money and man hours on it.
maybe the wife can come to some sort of peace that the man is not going to be murdered by the state, but he is not going to ever see the outside of the prison either.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Well, Mumia supporters gathered last night here in Philly at the Constitution center to demonstrate their continued support of his innocence. And protesters gathered outside to show their support for the sentence which may have comprised of some police organizations and believe or not, bikers, loud bikers. It was very disturbing as they reved their loud engines and helicopters circled the area for coverage. I had a nasty sinus headache last night and it aggravated the hell out of me. So I'm angered at both sides of the issue now
I too read about the case in the early 90's and believed it was a solid case at the time, perhaps I will have to review some of their issues. But I know this was no West Memphis 3 thing. I think that many of his celebrity supporters like Tim Robbins were involved because of the death penalty issue. It was a large amount of support last night so I suppose we will see more. I just hope it's more toward Center City or that I don't have a sinus headache next time
read below debunking the bs rhetoric of the moron mumia supporters.
http://justice.danielfaulkner.com/myths-about-mumia/
Nah, nothing fishy about it at all:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset ... 2000en.pdf
A Life in the Balance
The Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Amnesty International February 2000
In 1995, defence lawyers obtained approximately 700 pages of files on Mumia Abu-Jamal maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), via the Freedom of Information Act. These documents represented only a portion of the total files and were heavily censored.
The FBI began monitoring Abu-Jamal in 1969 when he was 15 years old, because of his activities at High
School and later with the Black Panther Party (BPP). According to a sworn affidavit by the attorney who
examined the files, Abu-Jamal was under surveillance as part of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Program,
COINTELPRO (see footnote 7), which operated with the cooperation and assistance of the Philadelphia police.
According to the affidavit: “Mr. Jamal was subjected to surveillance, harassment, disruption, politically
motivated arrests and attempted frame-ups by the FBI, who worked in conjunction with the Philadelphia Police Department.” Although the FBI classified Abu-Jamal as “armed and dangerous”, he was not convicted of any crime during this period. The documents reveal that the FBI was continuing to monitor Abu-Jamal as late as 1990, recording the details of one of his visitors while he was incarcerated in Huntingdon Prison.
http://blog.amnestyusa.org/deathpenalty ... abu-jamal/
Among other things, Amnesty’s report highlighted the prosecution’s use of peremptory strikes to dismiss African American jurors during trial; inadequate defense representation at trial and during the sentencing phase; the prosecution’s use of Abu-Jamal’s political statements to argue for a death sentence; overt hostility of the trial judge and the appearance of judicial bias during appellate review; the close political relationship between the Fraternal Order of Police and the (elected) Pennsylvania judiciary; and law enforcement’s unseemly agitation for execution throughout the process
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset ... 000en.html
The three prosecution eyewitnesses substantively altered their description of what they saw between their original statements to police and their trial testimony.
The witnesses were confused and unclear about the height of the shooter, what clothes he was wearing, in which hand he held the gun, and whether he ran away from the scene.
The alleged confession, reportedly crucial to the jury's decision and sentencing, was first reported more than two months after the shooting.
It directly contradicted the contemporaneous notes of one of the alleged witnesses to the confession (a police officer) that "the negro male made no comments." This evidence was not put before the jury.
There is also evidence that witnesses were offered inducements to alter their testimony in favour of the prosecution's version of events. This evidence was not put before the jury.
Lack of adequate ballistic tests to determine whether Abu-Jamal's gun had recently been fired. It was not determined, for instance, whether there was residue on his hands from firing a gun.
Some people just don't get it with this case and at this point, after years of appeals and arguments never will. The questions have been asked and answered in this case. I believe that corruption and conspiracies can exist; just not this one.
sad that some clowns just spew the bs rhetoric without knowing the true facts of the case. whether the fbi had one or one millions files on the dude is irrelevant to whether he fired the gun - a gun registered to him with a caliber of bullet he purchased.
Sad that some clowns try and pretend that all of the discrepancies with this case simply amount to the fact that the FBI kept over 700 files on him and that “Mr. Jamal was subjected to surveillance, harassment, disruption, politically motivated arrests and attempted frame-ups by the FBI, who worked in conjunction with the Philadelphia Police Department", while ignoring all of the other points raised, including Amnesty's full report: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset ... 2000en.pdf
2 questions for you
1) what does the fbi having files have to do with whether he fired the gun or not???
2) and have you actually read the trial transcripts?
The FBI having over 700 files on him along with years of him having been 'subjected to surveillance, harassment, disruption, politically motivated arrests and attempted frame-ups by the FBI' has nothing to do with whether he fired the gun or not. But that's not the point, as you know.
What does your question have to do with the following:
The ballistics evidence
Although all five bullets in Abu-Jamal’s gun were spent, the police failed to conduct tests to ascertain whether the weapon had been fired in the immediate past. The test is relatively simple: smell the gun for the odour of gun powder, which should be detectable for approximately five hours after the gun was fired. Compounding this error, the police also failed to conduct chemical tests on Abu-Jamal’s hands to find out if he had fired a gun recently.
The police appeared to be aware of the value of basic forensic testing. According to the testimony of Arnold Howard during the 1995 hearings, after he was arrested on suspicion of involvement in the Faulkner shooting, the police tested his hands to ascertain if he had fired a gun in the recent past. Howard was arrested because his driver’s license application form was in Faulkner’s possession.
As noted on page 12, the court refused to grant the defence funding sufficient to obtain expert witnesses. As a consequence, the jury was presented with no expert testimony to counter the prosecution’s assertion that Abu-Jamal had fired at Officer Faulkner and that the policeman was killed with Abu-Jamal’s weapon.
The prosecution maintained that Officer Faulkner turned and fired at Abu-Jamal as he fell to the ground after being shot. Therefore, the entry of the bullet into Abu-Jamal should have been on a level or upward trajectory. However, according to the medical records, the overall pathway of the bullet was downwards. During trial, the doctor who removed the bullet from Abu-Jamal (who admitted his lack of forensic expertise) was asked why the bullet would be "unnecessarily lowered in its trajectory" and speculated that "ricochet" and "tumble" were the explanation.
In 1992, an expert forensic pathologist employed by Abu-Jamal’s defence team examined the medical records and concluded:
“...For these reasons, there appears to be no reasons to postulate a ricochet to explain a downward course through the body. Rather, it is likely that the bullet had a downward course through the body because of the relative positions of Mr. Jamal and the shooter. Consistent relative positions include a standing shooter firing down on a prone Mr. Jamal, or a standing shooter firing horizontally at Mr. Jamal while Mr. Jamal was bent
over at the waist.”
Neither of these postures is consistent with the prosecution’s theory. The forensic pathologist also concluded that “since I disagree with both the Medical Examiner’s findings with respect to the cause of death and Dr. Coletta’s postulation of a possible ‘ricochet’...Mr. Jamal’s defense required, and would have been well served by, the testimony of a qualified forensic pathologist.”
There were also inconsistencies in the original findings concerning the bullet removed from Faulkner’s body. The Medical Examiner first wrote in his notes that the bullet was “.44 cal.” (Abu-Jamal’s gun was a .38 calibre weapon and could not possibly have fired such a bullet). This discrepancy, which was never made known to the jury, was later explained by the Medical Examiner as “part of the paper work but not an official finding.” At trial, the Medical Examiner testified that the bullet was consistent with those fired by Abu-Jamal’s gun but that those tests were inconclusive as to whether it actually came from his firearm. The court accepted the medical examiner as a ballistics expert. However, during the 1995 hearing, Judge Sabo contended that the medical examiner was “not a ballistics expert”" and that his original findings that the bullet was a .44 calibre were a “mere lay guess.”
In a case where the prosecution’s theory of the crime rests on a specific sequence of events involving an exchange of gunfire, the gathering of ballistics evidence is crucial--as is the ability of the defence to present its own expert testimony on the significance of that evidence.
The failure of the police to test Abu-Jamal’s gun, hands and clothing for evidence of recent firing is deeply troubling. Without the ability to hear and assess that missing evidence, the jury was required to reach a verdict based largely on the contradictory and variable testimony of a limited list of eye witnesses.
Yes.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset ... 2000en.pdf
A Life in the Balance
The Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Amnesty International February 2000
Witnesses to the crime: conflicting and confusing
During the trial, three witnesses testified that Abu-Jamal had run up to Officer Faulkner, shot him in the back and then stood over him and fired another bullet into his head, killing him instantly (although only one witness, White, claimed to have seen the events as described above in their entirety). None of the witnesses testified that Faulkner fired at Abu-Jamal as he fell to the ground - even when specifically asked - as the prosecution maintained. The prosecution also maintained that only Abu-Jamal, his brother William Cook and Officer Faulkner were present in the immediate vicinity of the crime scene.
In the years since the trial, defence lawyers have thrown into doubt the reliability of much of this trial testimony.
The complicated nature of the numerous accusations, counter accusations and withdrawing of statements and testimony make it impossible, based on the existing record, to reach definitive conclusions regarding the reliability of any witness. The prosecutors and police contend that the testimony presented at the trial was truthful and uncoerced, and that other witnesses to the crime were not called to testify as they had nothing relevant to add.
However, Abu-Jamal’s attorneys contend that a number of witnesses changed their original statements regarding what they saw on the night of the crime after being coerced, threatened or offered inducements by the police. Based on a comparison of their statements given to the police immediately after the shooting, their testimony during pretrial hearings and their testimony at the trial, the key witnesses did substantively alter their descriptions of what they saw, in ways that supported the prosecution’s version of events.
Cynthia White and Veronica Jones Cynthia White was a prostitute working in the area on the night in question. At the trial she testified that she had seen Mumia Abu-Jamal run up to Officer Faulkner, shoot him in the back, and then stand over him firing at his head.
Prior to the trial, White had given four written statements and one tape-recorded statement to the police. In one interview she estimated the height of the person who shot Faulkner to be shorter than five feet eight inches. Abu-Jamal is six feet one inch tall. In her first court appearance at a pretrial hearing, she testified that Abu-Jamal held the gun in his left hand. Three days later she testified that she was unsure which hand he held the gun in. At trial she denied knowing which hand the gun was in. During her trial testimony, she claimed that the diagram she originally drew of the incident was incorrect and that her placement of the actors
prior to Abu-Jamal’s appearance was inaccurate.
There is evidence to show that Cynthia White received preferential treatment from the prosecution and police. At the time of the trial, she was serving an 18-month prison sentence for prostitution in Massachusetts. She had 38 previous arrests for prostitution in Philadelphia; three of those charges were still pending at the time of trial. She was arrested twice within days of the shooting incident (12 and 17 December). According to Abu-Jamal’s current defence attorneys, there are no records of White ever being prosecuted for those arrests.
In 1987, a detective involved in the prosecution of Abu-Jamal testified in support of bail for White at a court hearing concerning charges of robbery, aggravated assault and possession of illegal weapons. Despite the judge pointing out that White had failed to appear in court on 17 different occasions and that she had "page after page" of arrests and convictions, the prosecution consented to the request that she be allowed to sign her own bail and the judge released her. According to information received by Amnesty International, White failed to appear in court on the charges and the authorities have since been unable to locate her. At an appeal hearings in 1997, the prosecution claimed Cynthia White was deceased and produced a 1992 death certificate in the name of Cynthia Williams, claiming that the fingerprints of the dead woman and White matched. However, an examination of the fingerprint records of White and Williams showed no match and the evidence that White is now dead is far from conclusive.
A second prostitute, Veronica Jones, witnessed the killing and testified for the defence. She claimed she had been offered inducements by the police to testify that she saw Abu-Jamal kill Faulkner, stating that "they [the police] were trying to get me to say something the other girl [White] said. I couldn’t do that." Jones went on to testify that "they [the police] told us we could work the area [as prostitutes] if we tell them [that Abu-Jamal was the shooter]."
However, Judge Sabo had the jury removed for this testimony and then ruled that Jones’ statements were inadmissible evidence. The jury were thus left unaware of the allegations that police officers were offering inducements in return for testimony against Abu-Jamal. In her testimony before the jury, Jones retracted her original statement to police that she saw two unidentified men leave the scene of the crime. Remarkably, Jackson had never interviewed his own witness (a standard practice) but Jones was interviewed by the prosecution prior to the trial.
In 1996, Veronica Jones testified at an appeal hearing that she changed her version of events after being visited by two police officers in prison, where she was being held on charges of robbery and assault. While cross-examining Jones, the prosecution announced to the court that there was an outstanding arrest warrant for Jones on charges of passing bad cheques and indicated that she would be arrested at the conclusion of her testimony.
In a sworn affidavit, Jones described her meeting with the plain clothes police officers:
“They told me that if I would testify against Jamal and identify Jamal as the shooter I wouldn’t have to worry about my pending felony charges...The detectives threatened me by reminding me that I faced a long prison sentence - fifteen years...I knew that if I did anything to help the Jamal defense I would face years in prison.”
After Abu-Jamal’s trial, Veronica Jones received a sentence of two years’ probation on the charges she was facing.
In January 1997, another former prostitute who worked in the area of the crime scene in 1981, came forward. In a sworn affidavit, Pamela Jenkins stated that she knew Cynthia White, who had told her she was afraid of the police and that the police were trying to get her to say something about the shooting of Faulkner and had threatened her life. Jenkins was the lover and informant of Philadelphia police officer Tom Ryan. In her statement, Jenkins claimed that Ryan "wanted me to perjure myself and say that I had seen Jamal shoot the police officer."
In 1996, Tom Ryan and five other officers from the same district went to prison after being convicted of charges of planting evidence, stealing money from suspects and making false reports. Their convictions resulted in the release of numerous prisoners implicated by the officers. Jenkins was a principal prosecution witness at the trials of the officers.
Robert Chobert
Robert Chobert had just let a passenger out of his cab and was parked when he viewed the incident. It is undisputed that he was closest to the scene of the prosecution eyewitnesses, parked in his cab a car's length behind Faulkner’s police car and approximately 50 feet from the shooting. According to his testimony and statements, he was writing in his logbook when he heard the first shot and looked up. He had to look over or past Faulkner's car, with its flashing red dome light, to see the incident and saw the shooter only in profile. Chobert testified at trial that when he looked up, he saw Faulkner fall and then saw Abu-Jamal "standing over him and firing some more shots into him. “Under cross-examination by Jackson, he stated: "I know who
shot the cop, and I ain't going to forget it.”
But Chobert's first recorded statement to police -- about which the jury was not told -- was that the shooter “apparently ran away”, according to a report written on 10 December 1981 by Inspector Giordano. Giordano encountered Chobert upon reaching the scene about five minutes after the shooting. Giordano wrote: “[A] white male from the crowd stated that he saw the shooting and that a black MOVE member had done it and appearently [sic] ran away. When asked what he ment [sic] bby [sic] a MOVE member, the white male stated, 'His hair, his hair,' apparently [sic] referring to dreadlocks.”
There are also discrepancies between Chobert’s description of the shooter’s clothes and weight and that of Abu-Jamal.
During the trial, Jackson attempted to introduce into evidence Chobert’s previous convictions for driving while intoxicated (twice) and the arson of a school, for which he was on probation. Jackson sought to introduce the convictions to challenge Chobert’s credibility, but Judge Sabo refused to allow the defence the opportunity to make the jury aware of Chobert’s convictions.
The jury were also left unaware that Chobert had been driving his cab with a suspended drivers’ license on the night of the killing; that it was still suspended at the time of the trial and that the police had never sought to charge him for this offence. According to Chobert’s testimony at the 1995 hearing, he had asked the prosecutor during the trial “if he could help me find out how I could get my license back”, which was “important” to him because “that's how I earned my living.” According to Chobert, the prosecutor told him that he would “look into it.”
During this final summation to the jury, the prosecutor emphasized Chobert’s testimony, telling the jury they could “trust” Chobert because “he knows what he saw”. The prosecutor suggested that Chobert’s testimony was given without anyone having influenced him, telling the jury: “do you think that anybody could get him to say anything that wasn’t the truth? I would not criticize that man one bit...What motivation would Robert Chobert have to make up a story...”.
However, subsequent revelations suggest that Chobert had substantial reasons to ingratiate himself with the authorities by corroborating their version of events.
Mark Scanlan
In one of his original statements to the police, Scanlan stated several times that he did not know whether Abu-Jamal or his brother shot Faulkner: “I don’t know who had the gun. I don’t know who fired it.” He also misidentified Abu-Jamal as the driver of the vehicle stopped by Officer Faulkner and was approximately 120 feet from the scene. A diagram that Scanlan drew for police indicated that Abu-Jamal and Faulkner were facing each other when the first shot was fired, contrary to the prosecution’s theory that the police officer was initially shot in the back.
At trial, Scanlan admitted that he had been drinking on the night in question and that “There was confusion when all three of them were in front of the car.”
The missing witnesses
Abu-Jamal’s attorneys also allege that a number of eye witnesses were not investigated by the defence because of a lack of resources and that the witnesses’ whereabouts were withheld from them by the prosecution. According to subsequent investigations by the current defence team, numerous witnesses have been located who claim to have seen other unidentified men fleeing the scene of the killing. Since this report is primarily concerned with the fairness of Abu Jamal’s original trial, Amnesty International has not analysed the statements of these potential witnesses. The defence filed an appellate brief in Federal court in October 1999 which summarizes these claims.
William Cook, Abu-Jamal’s brother and an obvious eyewitness to the killing, did not testify for either side at trial. He was convicted in separate proceedings of assaulting Faulkner. Cook made a statement to the police on the night of the shooting, and another to Abu-Jamal’s legal team in 1995. However, neither of these statements have been seen by Amnesty International. Abu-Jamal’s supporters have alleged that in 1982, Cook was being intimidated by the police and feared being charged in connection with the killing and was therefore too frightened to testify. Cook was scheduled to testify during the 1995 hearing but failed to appear.
Again it was alleged that this was due to fear of the police and of being arrested on unrelated charges in court. In his written denial of the 1995 appeal, Judge Sabo made negative assumptions regarding Cook’s unwillingness to testify. Since 1995, the defence team have been unable to locate Cook despite numerous attempts.
http://justice.danielfaulkner.com/myths ... ia/myth-1/
debunking that myth about the ballistics.
and don't you love that almost no one in the city Mumia was from, expect a radical anti-government group, supports Mumia? becuase the facts have been presented here. the facts apparantly don't translate overseas.
Daniel Faulkner.com? Are you kidding me? How about presenting an unbiased source?
well you don't believe trial transcripts so not sure how any reference you would consider unbiased.
We're not talking about trial transcripts. We're talking about Danielfaulkner.com
What trial transcripts are you pretending that I don't 'believe'?
you said you read the trial transcripts - and you said you don't believe mumia is a murderer - ergo you don't believe the trial transcripts. focus on your own justice system, stay out of ours.
The trial transcripts don't prove he committed the murder, as they fail to take in all of the other factors, including those I listed above.
And I'll focus on whatever I choose to focus on, thanks.
12 jurors would disagree - and his conviction has never been overturned in all of the appeals. all racists and paid off by the fbi or something???
I'm sure they would.
The jury: a fair and impartial panel of Abu-Jamal’s peers?
An essential element of a fair trial is the selection of an impartial jury of the defendant’s peers, one which will base its verdict solely on the evidence presented to it. Where a case generates a high degree of controversy and publicity, trial courts routinely grant a change of venue, to ensure that the jury has not been exposed to pretrial publicity that could bias its deliberations. Of approximately 80 people in the jury pool at Mumia Abu-Jamal’s trial, all but seven prospective jurors admitted that they were familiar with media coverage of the case.
The jury eventually selected (including the four alternate jurors) consisted of two blacks and 14 whites. The population of Philadelphia at the time of the trial was 40 per cent African American; a jury racially representative of the community could thus have been expected to include at least five black members.
The prosecution used 11 out of its 15 peremptory strikes to remove African Americans from the jury. In 1986, the US Supreme Court ruled in the case of Batson v. Kentucky that the removal of potential jurors must be “race neutral”. The jurors selected for the trial of Mumia Abu-Jamal appear to have received different treatment from the court according to their race. Jennie Dawley, black, was the only juror selected while Abu-Jamal was conducting his own defence. Dawley requested, before the trial started, that she be allowed to take her sick cat to the veterinarian during the evening, thereby not disrupting the court proceedings. Judge Sabo denied this request without informing the defence. Juror Dawley was dismissed from the jury when she failed to abide by the Court’s instruction. In contrast, a white juror requested permission to take a civil service exam during court time. Judge Sabo granted this request, temporarily halted the trial and instructed a court official to accompany the juror and ensure that he saw no media coverage of the trial.
Jennie Dawley was replaced by a white alternate juror, Robert Courchain. On at least five occasions during jury selection, Courchain stated that, although he would try, he might be unable to set aside his bias in the case. For example, he stated:
“unconsciously I don’t think I could be fair to both sides.” The defence sought the removal of Courchain “for cause” (i.e. that he was incapable of deliberating impartially), but Judge Sabo denied the request. As Jackson had previously used the one peremptory strike available to him at this point he was unable to prevent Courchain from becoming an alternate juror.
Jackson also allowed two jurors onto the jury whose life experiences could possibly prejudice them against Abu-Jamal. Juror number 11 was the close friend of a police officer who had been shot while on duty. While being questioned, he openly admitted that this experience could mean he was unable to be a fair juror because of his feelings concerning his friend. Juror number 15 (an alternate) was the wife of a serving police officer. Jackson allowed both onto the jury without objection.
mumia's defense team used 10 of 20 strikes to exclude black jurors - were they racist too? try again...next
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset ... 2000en.pdf
'The prosecution used 11 out of its 15 peremptory strikes to remove African Americans from the jury.'
Try again. And please stop making shit up.
Next.
what did i make up? mumia's defense struck 10 black jurors.
both sides have the right to strike jurors in the american justtice system - both chose to strike potential black jurors. so one side is racist for doing that but the other side is not? please enlighten me.
and how does that affect whether he pulled the trigger or not? again it doesn't. mumia supporters look for every angle except the fact that HE pulled the trigger - and his brother witnessed the crime and has never once testified that mumia didn't do it.
try again....
edit: in fact instead of trying to show racial bias somehow show me actual evidence of the crime that shows he didn't do it or that someone else did it? again enough of the racial rhethoric - show evidence of the CRIME not the aftermath please.
Please elaborate. Where's your source? And what's the context for why these jurors were struck?
http://www.iacenter.org/prisoners/mumia/maj_factsheet/
'The prosecution used what have since been ruled illegal means to keep Black people off the jury. Only two Black jurors served on this case, in a city that is 40 percent Black.'
Neither has he testified that he did do it. It's widely believed that the police threatened him with a separate offence and intimidated him into not testifying. Now why would they do that if they thought he would testify against his brother?
http://www.iacenter.org/prisoners/mumia/maj_factsheet/
'Eyewitnesses who were not called to testify in 1982 have come forward. They say Mumia Abu-Jamal was not the shooter. Eyewitness Veronica Jones says police threatened to jail her if she testified. Other witnesses, who testified against Abu-Jamal in the original trial, have changed their stories, saying police threatened and intimidated them.'
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset ... 2000en.pdf
William Cook, Abu-Jamal’s brother and an obvious eyewitness to the killing, did not testify for either side at trial. He was convicted in separate proceedings of assaulting Faulkner.
Cook made a statement to the police on the night of the shooting, and another to Abu-Jamal’s legal team in 1995. However, neither of these statements have been seen by Amnesty International. Abu-Jamal’s supporters have alleged that in 1982, Cook was being intimidated by the police and feared being charged in connection with the killing and was therefore too frightened to testify. Cook was scheduled to testify during the 1995 hearing but failed to appear.
Again it was alleged that this was due to fear of the police and of being arrested on unrelated charges in court. In his written denial of the 1995 appeal, Judge Sabo made negative assumptions regarding Cook’s unwillingness to testify. Since 1995, the defence team have been unable to locate Cook despite numerous attempts.
http://www.heureka.clara.net/art/mumia.htm
'The 'facts' not disputed are police officer Daniel Faulkner was shot on the street, 4 am 9 December 1981, after having stopped Mumia's brother's car and beating his brother with a flashlight. Mumia arrived on the scene moments later, and appears to have been shot by Faulkner as the bullet found in his body matched that of Faulkner's gun. Mumia and Faulkner were found on the ground not far apart.
Mumia was taken to hospital seriously injured, where he remained in critical condition for a period of time following emergency surgery. It was claimed by a female security guard at the hospital, a crucial witness in the prosecution case, that Mumia openly confessed to everyone within earshot that he had shot the policeman, adding for emphasis, 'I hope the motherfucker dies.' The surgeon who dealt with Mumia on the spot said he was to weak to speak. The police officer who took Mumia into custody and stayed with him stated in his written report that Mumia remained silent through the entire time he was with him. His testimony was not produced in court. The officer was unable to give evidence as he was 'on vacation'. A defence request for an adjournment to enable the witness to be called was refused. It was learnt later that Officer Wakshul, who wrote in his report that Jamal had made no statement at the hospital emergency, 'the defendant made no comment', was sitting at home and was available.
Priscilla Durham (who was a friend of the deceased officer) suddenly remembered the 'confession' two months after the event. She allegedly told her supervisor at the time, who also seemed to have not told anyone else or made a written note, and was not available for cross-examination in court. The event that jolted the memory of Priscilla Durham was several police officers suddenly recalling the 'confession', and their memories were jolted by Mumia, two months later, filing charges of police brutality for the beating he received on the night of the killing.
The key prosecution witness was a prostitute with a long history of arrests. She testified that she saw Mumia shoot Faulkner by running up behind him, shooting him once, and then firing again after he fell to the sidewalk. Her testimony contradicted previous statements and contradicted that of other witnesses. Another prostitute who was working the same area that night testified she was offered the same same deal as the prosecution witness: immunity from arrest by the police in return for her testimony against Mumia.
Cynthia White, the prosecution star witness, is a convicted prostitute. No one was able to place Cynthia White at the scene, including her friend Veronica Jones, another prostitute. Cynthia White has stated she did not see Mumia with a gun or notice which hand he allegedly used to shoot with.
Cynthia White was arrested in 1987 (five years after the trial) on armed robbery charges. Philadelphia homicide detective Douglas Culbreth appeared in court and asked that Cynthia White be released without posting money because she was 'a Commonwealth witness in a very high profile case.' Cynthia White subsequently failed to show up for her court date and has since disappeared.
Veronica Jones, who now testifies in support of Jamal, was threatened with the loss of her children if she did not support the police story.
Of the three remaining witnesses, all male, two said they saw Mumia run to the scene where the police officer was beating his brother. Both testified that gunfire erupted shortly after Mumia arrived, but neither saw Mumia shoot Faulkner. The third witness, a cab driver who had pulled up behind the police car, was closest to the shooting. He told police that a gunman fled the scene, before more police arrived, by running to where an alleyway intersects the sidewalk some thirty yards away. The gunman was a large, heavy man. In court, he testified the gunman took just a few steps and then sat down on the curb at the precise point where the police found Mumia, slumped over and bleeding profusely from his wound.
On the night of the incident, cab driver Robert Chobert said the man who shot Officer Faulkner ran down the block. However, at the trial he said the man 'slumped down on the curb 10 feet away'.
Jeff Scanlon, a white businessman, testified that he saw the defendant standing over the body firing. However, on the night of the incident in a written statement to police he described the 'assailant' as a heavy-set man with an Afro-hairstyle. Mumia Abu-Jamal wears long dreadlocks.
Dessie Hightower, a Black man, testified that Faulkner's gun was still in his holster when he was put into a wagon on route to the hospital. He witnessed the brutal beating of Mumia and the 'accidental' ramming of his head into a pole. He saw a man run away from the scene in dreadlocks.
A witness not called, a local resident, reported seeing a man flee the scene in the same direction as reported by cab driver Robert Chobert on the night. As did a third prostitute who observed one or two men running from the scene, but recanted her story after lengthy questioning by the police. In total, four witnesses situated in four separate locations on the street, none of whom knew each other or Mumia Abu-Jamal, reported seeing a gunman flee the scene, and all saw him fleeing in the same direction.
A key eyewitness, not called, was William Singletary. He saw the whole incident and has testified that Mumia Abu-Jamal was not the gunman. Singletary, a local businessman, was intimidated by police when he reported this, and subsequently fled the city.
William Singletary's testimony (11 August 1995) describes how police tore up his written statement, and forced him to sign a different statement which they dictated.
The prosecution case was that Mumia first shot Faulkner, wounding him slightly. When the officer returned fire and hit him, Mumia, angered, stood over Faulkner, who had since fallen to the sidewalk, and shot him in the face, killing him instantly. None of the witnesses saw this version of events, none even saw Mumia get shot.
Detective William Thomas, 15 year veteran, who was in charge of the whole investigation and described himself as the hub of the wheel that all the spokes fed into did not carry out any tests to determine if Mumia or Faulkner held a weapon that night.
A bullet first reported by the medical examiner as being in two fragments and of .44 calibre, reconstructed itself together and became one bullet of .38 calibre 'consistent' with Mumia's gun. The prosecution ballistics expert claimed he could not match the bullet recovered from Faulkner's body to Mumia's gun due to the fragmented nature of the bullet. A copper bullet jacket was found at the scene. The police ballistics expert testified that the bullets in both Faulkner's gun and Mumia's gun did not have copper jackets. The defence was unable to provide a ballistics expert due to lack of funds.
The Medical Examiner wrote in his report 'shot w/ 44 cal', the gun owned by Mumia Abu-Jamal was .38 calibre. Mumia was carrying a legally purchased gun on his job as a late night cab driver because he had been robbed several times.
It was learnt later that the police never tested Mumia Abu-Jamal's gun to see if it had been recently fired, never tested Mumia's hands to see if he had fired a gun, had no proof that Mumia's gun was the fatal weapon, and have lost a bullet fragment removed by the medical examiner.
The 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 his court.
Judge Sabo rejected an appeal on the grounds that the original trial had been flawless, and even had one of the defence attorneys taken out in handcuffs.
Are you still going to pretend that this is a closed case that contains nothing fishy?
http://www.abu-jamal-news.com/article.php?name=framing4
In his new book b]The Framing of Mumia Abu-Jamal[/b, O’Connor argues that Abu-Jamal was clearly framed by police, and that the actual shooter was a man named Kenneth Freeman.
Hans Bennett: Advocates of Abu-Jamal's conviction and execution always say that a police frame-up of Abu-Jamal is a lunatic, far-fetched "conspiracy theory" that should be dismissed by any sane observer. What do you mean when you say he was "framed"? How was this done?
J. Patrick O'Connor: Mumia's early association with the Philadelphia branch of the Black Panther Party marked him as a subversive to George Fencl, the chief inspector of the Philadelphia Police Department’s Civil Defense Bureau. His subsequent sympathetic coverage of MOVE while reporting for the local public radio station made him an avowed enemy of Mayor Frank Rizzo. Minutes after Officer Faulkner was shot at 3:55 a.m., Inspector Alfonzo Giordano – who reported directly to Fencl – took command of the crime scene and personally set in motion the framing of Abu-Jamal. It would be Giordano who claimed that Mumia told him in the paddy wagon that he dropped his gun after he shot Faulkner; it would be Giordano who arranged for prostitute Cynthia White and felon Robert Chobert to identify Abu-Jamal as the shooter. Giordano and White would be the D.A. Office’s only witnesses at the preliminary hearing to hold Abu-Jamal over for trial where Giordano repeated this “confession.”
Giordano is as corrupt a police officer as one can imagine. For years he had been extorting kickbacks – personally averaging $3,000 per month – from Center City prostitutes, pimps and bar owners, which explains his early arrival at the crime scene. He knew Cynthia White and her pimp. He coerced her at the scene to identify Abu-Jamal as the shooter. She would be the only witness the D.A. had to claim to see Abu-Jamal holding a gun over Faulkner. In her original statement to the police – given within an hour of the shooting – she had Abu-Jamal running from the parking lot and from as far away as 10-yards firing off “four or five shots” at Faulkner before the officer fell. In her third interview with police detectives, given on December 17, she fine-tuned her statement to comport with the actual evidence in the case that Faulkner was shot at close range. (In one of the most sinister aspects of Abu-Jamal’s case, the police department waited until the Monday after Abu-Jamal’s conviction to “relieve” Giordano of his duties on what would prove to be well-founded “suspicions of corruption.” Four years after Abu-Jamal’s trial, Giordano pled guilty to tax evasion in connection with those payouts and was sent to prison.)
Incredibly, the police arriving at the crime scene would later claim not to have conducted any tests to determine if Abu-Jamal had recently fired a gun by checking for powder residue on his hands or clothing, nor did they claim to even feel or smell his gun to determine if it had been recently fired. Tests such as these are so routine at murder scenes that it is almost inconceivable the police did not run them. It is more likely that they did not like the results of the tests.
From the outset, the investigation into the shooting death of Officer Faulkner was conducted with one goal in mind: to hang the crime on Mumia Abu-Jamal. There was no search for the truth, no attempt at providing the slain officer with the justice he deserved. Giordano handed Abu-Jamal to the D.A.’s Office with his own lie about Abu-Jamal confessing to him and packing off Cynthia White in a squad car to tell her concocted account of the shooting. When the D.A.’s Office was forced to back away from the corrupt Giordano, Assistant D.A. Joseph McGill elicited a new “confession” to replace Giordano’s in February when security guard Priscilla Durham and Officer Garry Bell, Faulkner’s best friend on the police force, responded to his promptings by saying they heard Abu-Jamal blurt out at the hospital, “I shot the mother-fucker and I hope the mother-fucker dies.” Not one of the dozens of other officers present at the hospital would make such a claim. In fact, the two officers who accompanied Abu-Jamal from the time he was placed in the paddy wagon until he went into surgery, reported that he made no comments in signed statements given to detectives assigned to the case that morning.
The prosecution knew that its new “confession” could be skewered if Abu-Jamal’s defense attorney, Anthony Jackson, called the two officers who accompanied Abu-Jamal to the stand, so all the prosecution really had was Cynthia White. With White saying she saw it all from beginning to end, and willing to testify that she saw Abu-Jamal blow the helpless Faulkner’s brains out in ruthless cold blood, McGill had his case made, providing White’s credibility could survive Jackson’s cross-examination. McGill bet the entire case that it could, and despite the utter web of lies she told the jury, was right.
Bennett: Why do you think that Kenneth Freeman was the actual shooter of Police Officer Daniel Faulkner?
O'Connor: Kenneth Freeman was Billy Cook’s street vendor partner and was riding with him in the VW when Faulkner pulled the VW over. Freeman got out of the VW and subsequently handed Faulkner a phony driver’s license application bearing the name of Arnold Howard, which Howard had recently loaned to him. Howard’s papers were found in Faulkner’s shirt pocket. Police rounded up both Howard and Freeman in the early morning hours of December 9 and brought them in for questioning. At the Post-Conviction Relief Act hearing in 1995, Howard testified that on several occasions, Cynthia White picked Freeman out of a lineup.
At Billy Cook’s March 29 trial for assaulting Officer Faulkner, with McGill as the prosecutor, White told McGill in direct testimony that the passenger in the VW “had got out.” McGill said, “He got of the car”? White responded, “Yes.” (At Abu-Jamal’s trial, McGill got White to testify that only Abu-Jamal, Cook, and Faulkner were at the scene.)
Various witnesses said they saw a black man running from the scene right after the shooting. Some of the eyewitnesses said this man had an Afro and wore a green army jacket. Freeman did have an Afro and he perpetually wore a green army jacket. Freeman was tall and burly, weighing about 225 pounds at the time.
Cab driver Robert Harkins was driving right by the parked police car and the VW when he saw a police officer grab a man. The man “then spun around and the officer went to the ground,” falling face down backwards, landing on his hands and knees. The assailant shot the officer in the back, causing him to roll over on his back, and then executed him with a shot to his forehead.
Harkins described the shooter as a little taller and heavier than the 6-foot, 200-pound Faulkner. Robert Chobert told police in his first statement that the shooter had an Afro and weighed about 225 pounds. (Abu-Jamal, also about 6-foot, wore his hair in dreadlocks and weighed 170 pounds at the time.)
In Billy Cook’s April 29, 2001, affidavit he declared that Freeman was with him the night of the shooting, was armed, and fled the scene after Faulkner was shot. Cook said he did not see who shot Faulkner.
Freeman would meet an ignominious death hours after Philadelphia police firebombed the MOVE house on Osage Avenue in 1985, killing 11 MOVE members, including John Africa, whose corpse had been beheaded. Freeman’s dead body was found bound, gagged and naked in a vacant lot. There would be no police investigation into this obvious murder. The coroner listed his cause of death as a heart attack. The timing and modus operandi of the abduction and killing alone suggest an extreme act of police vengeance.