A pivotal hearing on case of Abu-Jamal
Mumia Abu-Jamal, on death row for a police killing, realizes what's at stake
Thursday,his lawyer said.
On July 3, 1982, a Philadelphia jury took just four hours to sentence Mumia
Abu-Jamal to death for murdering Police Officer Daniel Faulkner.
Nearly a quarter-century later, Abu-Jamal has remained alive through a
series of appeals. His bid to escape the death penalty is now at a critical
stage.
The case will be argued this week in the region's federal appeals court, and
if Abu-Jamal loses, Philadelphia'
be in imminent peril of lethal injection.
"He realizes that death is just a few doors away," said his attorney, Robert
R. Bryan, a San Francisco lawyer who specializes in death-penalty appeals.
On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit in Philadelphia will hear legal argument on whether the death
sentence should be upheld, or whether Abu-Jamal should get a new trial or a
new sentencing hearing.
Bryan said that Abu-Jamal, now 53 and known as "Pops" to younger inmates,
realizes that his life is on the line. "He and I are very realistic about
what's at stake," said Bryan.
The Philadelphia District Attorney's Office declined to comment on
Thursday's proceeding. In voluminous court papers, prosecutors contend that
Abu-Jamal had a fair trial, and that he should be executed.
Abu-Jamal is one of 225 inmates awaiting execution in Pennsylvania, which
has the fourth-largest death row in the nation behind California, Florida
and Texas. More than half of the death-row inmates are from Philadelphia.
Since Pennsylvania reinstated the death penalty in 1978, three prisoners
have been executed; they gave up their appeals and asked to die.
The Third Circuit, which handles appeals over federal cases in Pennsylvania,
Delaware, New Jersey and the Virgin Islands, moves cautiously on
death-penalty cases.
A number of other death-row appeals are pending in the court.
Though a decision in the Abu-Jamal case is not expected for months, the
two-hour proceeding this week promises to refocus national and international
attention on one of the city's most notorious cases.
Bryan said that lawyers and lawmakers from France and Germany are planning
to attend the proceeding at the U.S. Courthouse at Sixth and Market Streets.
Abu-Jamal, a former radio reporter then driving a cab, was convicted in 1982
of the shooting death of Faulkner, who had just pulled over Abu-Jamal's
brother near 13th and Locust Streets in the early-morning hours of Dec. 9,
1981.
Abu-Jamal ran from a parking lot across the street. Faulkner was shot and
killed, and Abu-Jamal was wounded in an exchange of gunfire.
Prosecutors contended that Abu-Jamal fired the shots that killed Faulkner;
Abu-Jamal contended that another man killed Faulkner and then fled the
scene.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld his conviction and sentence in 1989
and also rejected subsequent appeals.
In 2001, after the case proceeded into federal court, U.S. District Judge
William H. Yohn Jr. upheld the conviction and rejected all but one of the 29
legal points raised by the defense.
Yohn overturned the death sentence, ruling that the jury may have mistakenly
believed it had to agree unanimously on any "mitigating" circumstance - a
factor that might have caused the jury to opt for life.
As a result, Yohn said that Abu-Jamal should be sentenced to life in prison
or get a new hearing only on the question of whether he should get death or
life.
The District Attorney's Office appealed Yohn's decision to vacate the death
sentence; Abu-Jamal and his lawyers have appealed, contending that Yohn also
should have granted a new trial on the question of guilt.
The Third Circuit panel will now review Yohn's decision.
The court also will consider whether there was racial bias during jury
selection and whether Abu-Jamal's constitutional rights were violated by the
prosecutor's closing argument and by the alleged bias of the trial judge,
Albert Sabo, during post-conviction review.
Bryan said the case boils down to the fundamental right to a fair trial, and
that he believes there is plenty of reason for the Third Circuit to order a
new trial.
He said that if the Third Circuit reverses Yohn and upholds the death
penalty, that would result in a "fast-track to the death chamber" for
Abu-Jamal.
He said the Third Circuit also could:
Uphold Yohn and order a new sentencing hearing.
Grant a new trial.
Send the case back to Yohn for a hearing.
Abu-Jamal also has a petition pending in the state Supreme Court. If the
death sentence is upheld, he still could try to persuade the state Supreme
Court to review the case again, or ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an
appeal. But the nation's highest court considers only a select number of
cases each year, and once a death-row defendant is in a federal appeals
court, that is generally considered one of the final stops in the long
appellate route of capital cases.
Abu-Jamal has long been a lightning rod in the debate about capital
punishment in America. While law-enforcement officials have despised him for
killing one of their own, entertainment figures, academics and
anti-death-penalty activists have rallied on his behalf.
From prison, Abu-Jamal has become a prolific writer who speaks out about his
view of injustices on a range of issues.
But at his trial, Abu-Jamal came across as angry and arrogant. He insulted
the jury and referred to Sabo as "a hangman." And when jurors announced the
sentence in a hushed courtroom, Abu-Jamal glared at them.
Center City lawyer Joseph J. McGill, who prosecuted the case, said last week
that the Abu-Jamal of 1982 was an angry defendant who tried to mount a 1970s
style defense of police persecution. Abu-Jamal was repeatedly removed from
the courtroom because of his behavior, McGill said, and the atmosphere was
tense.
"It was like a circus, and he wanted to be the ringmaster," McGill said of
Abu-Jamal.
McGill said that it will be interesting to see what the Third Circuit
decides - and that he plans to be there on Thursday.
"I wouldn't miss it for the world," he said.
---
Source : Philadelphia Inquirer
http://www.philly.
f_Abu-Jamal.
***
May 13, 2007
Pennsylvania
International drama fails to mention 'Danny'
Joseph P. Owens, The Express Times
When I was 18 years old, a police officer in my hometown was murdered. He
was shot and killed on a Center City street in Philadelphia.
I didn't know officer Daniel Faulkner or the man charged with killing him.
Defendant Mumia Abu-Jamal was a former radio journalist who had been driving
a cab to make ends meet.
What I remember vividly was the television footage of the policeman's
funeral for Faulkner and the sight of his father at graveside singing a
booming, heart-wrenching rendition of "Danny Boy" with tears streaming down
his face.
Later, I remember following Abu-Jamal's circuslike trial as it unfolded in
the city. It was a mess. A militant and belligerent Abu-Jamal did little to
assist in his defense and did everything to disrupt the procedure. The judge
didn't help matters, displaying a gross lack of judicial temperament.
I thought of Faulkner just last week, 25 years later, as I was visiting my
favorite cheesesteak shop and noticed a photograph of the slain police
officer mounted on the wall. I also remembered "Danny Boy."
I thought of Abu-Jamal late last week when I received an e-mail from someone
in California. San Francisco, France, Denmark and other places have become
central locations for experts on the Abu-Jamal case. Pardon me if I don't
become sweaty with excitement at people in those places who believe they
must right an injustice in our portion of the world.
By now you know Abu-Jamal's case has somehow become a global cause for the
internationally rich and famous. I was reminded of this Friday in the e-mail
sent to more than 100 news organizations, requesting coverage of this week's
hearing on Abu-Jamal's case in the U.S Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit.
"This case concerns, not only Mumia Abu-Jamal's right to a fair trial, but
the struggle against the death penalty and the racist political repression
of an outspoken journalist," said Kay Lawson, professor emerita, political
science, San Francisco State University.
Hmmmmm.
"Mumia Abu-Jamal is recognized internationally as a political prisoner whose
constitutional rights have been consistently violated in the state's mad
dash to railroad him to execution."
OK, that's enough. The e-mail has more, but it's more than I can take. Same
with the dozen or so more that showed up in my inbox.
I'm willing to trust the system to tell us if this man received a fair
trial. I'm willing to accept the idea of a new trial if the courts decide he
deserves it. But I'm not willing to consider "his services to humanity as a
voice of conscience." I won't allow myself to see this as anything more than
an imperfect-but-
Did he get a fair trial or didn't he? If a new trial is ordered, did he do
it or not? And by the way, if he didn't do it, who did kill Daniel Faulkner?
Will there be an international effort seeking to right that injustice?
The e-mail from professor Lawson doesn't say. In fact, Faulkner's name isn't
mentioned.
Faulkner seems forgotten in the argument for Abu-Jamal, but I remember him.
"Danny Boy" hasn't sounded the same since.
---
Source : The Express Times (Joseph P. Owens is editor of The Express-Times.
He can be reached at 610-258-7171 or by e-mail at jowens@express-
http://www.nj.
29268242930.
PDF
No comments:
Post a Comment