US Court Overturns Mumia Abu-Jamal’s Death Sentence
On Thursday, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the death sentence of the imprisoned journalist and former Black Panther, Mumia Abu-Jamal, while upholding his conviction and rejected his call for a new trial. A three-judge panel ruled that Abu-Jamal, who has been on death row for twenty-six years, deserves a new sentencing hearing because the jury was given flawed instructions in the penalty phase. They ruled that Mumia Abu-Jamal must be sentenced to life in prison for killing Daniel Faulkner or get a chance with a new Philadelphia jury that would decide only whether he should be sentenced to life or get the death penalty. (h/t to EBW at Wampum)
Abu-Jamal’s lead attorney, Robert R. Bryan, told Democracy Now! that he will request a hearing before the full appeals court “within the next few weeks.”
JUAN GONZALEZ: So now, with this, since this was a decision, a split decision, of a panel of the Third Circuit, is it possible then to appeal to the entire Third Circuit on this decision?
ROBERT BRYAN: Well, Juan, you’ve actually—you’ve certainly been doing your homework. That’s exactly what we will be doing within the next few weeks. And that is, this was a decision by three judges, two-to-one; now we will be going before the entire court, all the judges, asking them to review this issue.
Abu-Jamal was sentenced to death in 1982 for the murder of police officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981 after the police officer pulled over Abu-Jamal’s brother, William Cook, in an overnight traffic stop. According to court records, Abu-Jamal, who was on the opposite side of the street, ran toward Officer Faulkner and Cook. As he approached, Abu-Jamal shot Faulkner in the back. As Faulkner was falling to the ground, he drew his own gun and managed to shoot Abu Jamal in the chest, wounding but not killing him. Abu-Jamal was taken directly from the scene of the shooting to Thomas Jefferson University Hospital to receive treatment for his injuries.
The case went to trial in June 1982 in Philadelphia. Judge Albert F. Sabo initially agreed to Abu-Jamal’s request to represent himself, with criminal defense attorney Anthony Jackson acting as his legal advisor. During the first day of the trial this decision was reversed and Jackson was ordered to resume acting as Abu-Jamal’s sole advocate by reason of what the judge deemed to be intentionally disruptive actions on Abu-Jamal’s part.
Abu-Jamal has argued in numerous appeals that racism by the judge and prosecutors corrupted his conviction at the hands of a mostly white jury. In his dissent, Judge Thomas Ambro, a Clinton appointee to the bench, strongly criticized his two colleagues, Chief Judge Anthony Scirica and Judge Robert Cowan (both Reagan appointees), and said their was racism in this case. Judge Ambro felt there was racial bias when it came to jury selection in Mumia Abu-Jamal trial. Judge Ambro also accused his colleagues of having a double standard in their rulings.
Our Court has previously reached the merits of Batson claims on habeas review in cases where the petitioner did not make a timely objection during jury selection—signaling that our Circuit does not have a federal contemporaneous objection rule—and I see no reason why we should not afford Abu-Jamal the courtesy of our precedents.
Judge Thomas Ambro also disputed the timeliness standard and said that Abu-Jamal presented enough evidence to warrant further investigation of the exclusion claims. Read the court’s full opinion click here.
Although it is disappointing that the court did not give Abu-Jamal a new trail, however, his attorney does see the silver lining to in the ruling and Judge Thomas Ambro’s dissent and still feels he can free Mumia Abu-Jamal.
For more information on the free Mumia Abu-Jamal movement, click here and here.
To listen to Mumia’s commentaries, visit prisonradio.org and fsrn.org

Put forth on March 28, 2008 by XicanoPwr
Posted in
Tags: 



1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
4 Comments
You can follow any responses to this entry through the
Comments (RSS) feed.
Thanks for putting this up, XP – in my (very) brief survey, you’re one of the few who took note – not even a peep at mcats . . .
Given Clinton era AEDPA impediments to having new evidence heard by a court, it wasn’t too surprising that the innocence claims were dismissed. What’s really shocking is that they dismissed the Batson claims – esp. considering the Alito authored decision last week – w/ Ambro’s dissent in hand, it’d hard to imagine that either en en banc hearing or the full Supremes won’t look at them more favorably.
Dave Lindorff had a good piece at Counterpunch, The Mumia Exception.
Thanks. You are correct that very few bloggers notice the courts recent ruling. I would have missed it if it wasn’t the post I say on Wampum. After reading Ambro’s dissent, I can see what he blasted his colleagues for posing a double standard.
I saw Lindorff’s piece, but on OpEd News.
Go to http://partisandefense.org for a carefully documented summary of the facts in the Mumia’s case.
This man was convicted was sentenced to death and the death warrant was signed . . . so my hard earned tax dollars have to go to supplying him with 3 meals a day, his slothing, and yet I have to listen to him chant about how he was wrongfully accussed of this crime? What the F??k? I’ll pay the electric bill . . . Fry him! He did not give Officer Faulkner any appeals before he kill him . . . Did he?
Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.