Mumia Abu-Jamal: Trial and Injustice

Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted and sentenced for the murder of police officer Daniel Faulkner. Since the 1982 sentencing, there has been much speculation of injustice surrounding his trial. Many disagree on whether he is innocent or guilty, the severity of his punishment, and he received a fair trial.

On December 9, 1981 officer Daniel Faulkner was shot and killed on a traffic stop of a vehicle registered to William Cook, Mumia Abu-Jamal's brother. Mumia Abu-Jamal was shot by Daniel Faulkner and was taken to Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. Later he was charged with the first-degree murder of Daniel Faulkner.

The prosecution case at trial consisted of four witnesses whose testimony put Mumia Abu-Jamal at the crime scene. It also included testimony of Abu-Jamal admitting to the murder while at the hospital for his injuries. The defense trial consisted of nine character witnesses, and others who claimed to have seen another man running from the scene.

Post-trial developments depict a very different scene than that portrayed to the jury. Many believe that racism, Jamal's involvement in the Black Panther Political party and his exposure of police brutality prevented the completion of the appeal process and re-trial. The following are post-trial developments and factors found directly from http://www.freemumia.org/.

The Evidence-The prosecution claimed that the shot which killed Faulkner came from Mumia Abu-Jamal’s legally registered .38-caliber weapon, contradicting the medical examiner’s report that the bullet removed from Faulkner’s brain was a .44-caliber. This fact was kept from the jury. Moreover, a ballistics expert found it incredible that police at the scene failed to test Mumia’s gun to see if has been recently fired, or to test his hands for powder residue. One of the most damning prosecution claims was that Mumia confessed at the hospital. However, this confession was not reported until nearly two months after December 9th, immediately after Mumia had filed a brutality suit against the police. One of the officers who claims to have heard the confession is Gary Wakshul. However, in his police report on that day he stated, “the Negro male made no comments.” Dr. Coletta, the attending physician who was with Mumia the entire time, says that he never heard Mumia speak.
The Witnesses-The star prosecution witness, a prostitute named Cynthia White, was someone no other witness reported seeing at the scene. During the trial of Billy Cook (Mumia’s brother) just weeks before Mumia’s trial, White gave testimony completely contradictory to what she stated at Mumia’s trial. Her testimony at Billy Cook’s trial placed someone at the scene who was not there when police arrived. This corroborates the other five witness accounts that someone fled the scene. In a 1997 hearing, another former prostitute, Pamela Jenkins, testified that White was acting as a police informant. Other sworn testimony revealed that witness coercion was routinely practiced by the police. In 1995, eyewitness William Singletary testified that police repeatedly tore up his initial statement--that the shooter fled the scene--until he finally signed something acceptable to them. The following year, witness Veronica Jones came forward to testify that she had been coerced into changing her initial statement that two men fled the scene. Witness Billy Cook, who was present the whole time, has stated very clearly that Mumia is absolutely innocent.
The Sentence-Due to police manipulation of witnesses, fabrication of evidence, and the rights of the defense severely denied, Mumia was found guilty. He was sentenced to death during the penalty phase based solely on his political beliefs. Mumia has been unjustly separated from his family for twenty-two years, with the threat of death looming over his head.
New WitnessesIn 2001, court stenographer Terri Maurer-Carter came forward and stated that in 1982, before Mumia’s trial began, she heard Judge Sabo say, “Yeah, and I’m going to help them fry the n****r.” He was referring to Mumia. This backs up evidence of judicial bias and racism in Mumia’s case. In the same year, esteemed Philadelphia journalist Linn Washington stated that on the morning of December 9th, 1981, he went to the scene to report on it--and no police were present. This backs up prior claims that police didn’t handle the crime scene properly.
The Confession-In 1999, Arnold Beverly confessed to killing Officer Faulkner. This confession is validated by a lie detector test administered by eminent polygraph expert Charles Honts. Despite concrete evidence supporting this confession, the Philadelphia District Attorney has refused to investigate, and the courts have not even allowed it to be heard. The injustice continues . . .
The Decisions-On December 18th, 2001, Judge Yohn issued a decision on the Habeas Corpus petition in Federal District Court. He upheld Mumia’s unjust conviction, but challenged the sentencing phase (the death sentence). This means there could be a new sentencing hearing after all appeals are resolved, but the only options are life in prison with no possibility of parole or another death sentence. This is not justice. There is massive evidence of Mumia’s innocence and he should be absolutely free. Mumia’s legal team filed an appeal of this decision in January of 2002. Mumia remains on death row until all appeals by both sides are heard.
Judge Pamela Dembe’s November 21, 2001, rejection of Mumia’s request to reopen the PCRA hearings was appealed by Mumia’s legal team. Judge Dembe based her decision almost entirely on the Peterkin case, which has just been overturned! On October 8, 2003, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected the appeal, stating that the Beverly confession cannot be heard due to time limitations. The court also stated that Terri Maurer-Carter’s testimony is irrelevant. The struggle continues.

There has been a worldwide movement in support for Mumia Abu-Jamal including celebrities like Susan Sarandon and Danny Glover. If you believe in justice, Mumia's innocence and human rights you can go on http://www.freemumia.org/ to learn more about the case and print out informational flyers to spead the word.

Reflecting on the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment

Syphilis is characterized as sexually transmitted venereal disease that if left untreated can cause heart disease, blindness, insanity, tumors, paralysis and death. In an embarrassment to the United States, the U.S. Public Health Service conducted an experiment on 399 black men in Tuskegee, Alabama. This experimentation that lasted forty years from 1932 to 1972 was not authorized by its test subjects. These human guinea pigs were disadvantaged African Americans, mostly impoverished and illiterate sharecroppers that were misled in participating by offering them "free treatment" and funeral expenses.

The basis of the experimentation was to see how syphilis affected blacks as opposed to Caucasians. It was believed that syphilis affected whites neurologically while in blacks it leads to cardiovascular degeneration. The experiments consisted of leaving the subjects untreated and observing and recording symptoms and complications, and finally performing an autopsy. To assure the subjects returned they lured them by promoting "Last Chance for Special Free Treatment"- which was actually a potentially dangerous spinal tap. One doctor involved in the experiments was quoted saying “As I see it, we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”

Throughout the experiment, its conductors contended that its subjects did not receive any type of treatment. They were deliberately denied medication that would have cured them, even during WWII when some men registered for the draft and were consequently exempt from receiving the required medication. By the end of the experiment, 28 died directly from the disease, 100 0thers died of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected and 19 of their children were born with it. The information obtained has not assisted in the clinical treatment of syphilis and their main objective for the experiments outcome is unclear. “Nothing learned will prevent, find, or cure a single case of infectious syphilis or bring us closer to our basic mission of controlling venereal disease in the United States.”

It is important to remember instances such as these in American History that are rarely spoken of. There is clearly a racial aspect of the experiments and a superior attitude expressed by the government officials that issued this unfortunate project. Not many people know about the Tuskegee Experiments; however it is an event that highlights the ongoing discrimination and disregard for disadvantaged African Americans that the United States has expressed since its foundation. The fact that this was a government issued project makes it difficult for many African Americans to trust healthcare today. If our own government is capable of deliberately not treating a degenerative disease it has to make one wonder what else they are willing to experiment.

Limitations on the First Amendment

Our First Amendment rights are those which the citizens of the United States are free to exercise and were bravely fought for. But what happens in modern day America when exercising our right of free speech is penalized by the government? One of the qualities our nation's founders prided themselves in was our right to petition the government, as long as while doing so we abide by all laws. Our First Amendment rights are what distinguished the United States from its 18th century European counterparts and is vital to our democratic system.

Walter Murphy, a Princeton professor is known to be an influential constitutional scholar of our day. Among his many accomplishments he is a retired Marine, and has written many books concerning Constitutional democracy and modern politics. On his way to a conference for his latest book, he was stopped at the airport and informed that he was placed on the government's no-fly list for speaking out against the Bush Administration. At the airport he was asked if he'd attended any anti-war protests because many people are banned from flying for that reason. When he attempted to find out more about this list he was denied access to who compiles the no-fly list and what criteria is used to make the list.
It is understandable that in post 9/11 America the government would take extra precautions to ensure the safety of its citizens, but since Walter Murphy expressed his concerns many others have come out and have spoken of their similar experiences. The fact that many of the people on this list happen to be critics of the White House and anti-war advocates has to make us wonder if our freedom of expression is being restricted. The fact that airport officials stated that many people are banned from flying for attending peace marches, arises memories of the Gestapo in Nazi Germany. If anything, "violators" should at least be informed on the basis of their presence on the no-fly list, and the fact that they are not further questions the motives behind it.

As we cannot know for sure, we may just hope that instances such as this do not increase in prevalence. As a nation we must defend our precious rights and stand against forces that limit them.