Black People : Today; a Crutial Day for Mumia and the future of Justice for all of us in America

Discussion in 'Black People Open Forum' started by Ankhur, Nov 6, 2010.

  1. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    This is a prime example of why we need our own black FREE televison and radio, becuase we would have had advanced notice of this



    WHY THE NOVEMBER 9, 2010 HEARING ON MUMIA IS SO CRITICALFree Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition
    www.freemumia.com
    [email protected]
    (212)330-8029

    The only legal options to be considered at the Third Circuit's November 9 hearing are whether Mumia Abu-Jamal is to be executed or get life in prison without parole. Clearly neither of those two options is acceptable.
    To fully grasp the significance of the hearing, one needs to revisit Federal District Court Judge William Yohn, Jr.'s decision of December 18, 2001. In that ruling the judge upheld Mumia's conviction but at the same time threw out his death sentence on the grounds that the verdict form used by the jury for sentencing at his trial violated the U.S. Supreme Court's Mills precedent and therefore entitled Mumia to have his death sentence overturned.
    Yohn then gave the state 180 days to convene a new jury trial only on the issue of Mumia's penalty, in which the choices would be either death or life in prison without parole. On the other hand, if the state did nothing, Yohn ruled that Mumia would automatically be sentenced to life in prison without parole.

    At the time Judge Yohn stayed his ruling on the death sentence while the state appealed his decision to the next higher level of federal court, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. (At the same time Mumia cross-appealed Judge Yohn's decision upholding Mumia's conviction.) Mumia was therefore never removed from Death row and remains there to this day.

    On March 27, 2008, the Third Circuit upheld Yohn's decision on the death penalty on a 3-0 vote. Again the decision was stayed while the state appealed to the highest federal level, the Supreme Court. (In the same decision, the Third Circuit rejected Mumia's appeal on the conviction by 2-1 and, as before, Mumia cross-appealed that ruling.)

    On January 10, 2010, the Supreme Court ordered the Third Circuit to reconsider its decision on the death sentence in light of its simultaneously-issued ruling unanimously rejecting an appeal from a white-supremacist named Spisak. That man admitted to killing at least two people in Ohio and openly wished to have murdered more. He had appealed his death sentence also as a violation of Mills, but involving a different aspect of it than Mumia's case.
    The Sixth Circuit, as did the Third Circuit in Mumia's case, ruled that the death sentence should be vacated, but the Supreme Court ruled that the Mills precedent did not apply in Spisak's case, and that therefore execution rather than life in prison was the appropriate penalty. Based on that decision, the Supreme Court immediately applied the same argument to Mumia's case and asked for the Third Circuit to reconsider the issue of execution for Mumia as well.

    Thus, the hearing on November 9th is on Mumia's penalty only. The choices before the court are either to sustain Yohn's and its own earlier decisions or to reinstate the death penalty, clearing the way for Mumia's possible quick execution.

    If the Third Circuit reaffirms its earlier decision to sentence Mumia to life in prison without parole, the state will most likely appeal to the Supreme Court. (This is exactly what happened with Spisak, after the Sixth Circuit upheld its own earlier ruling which had overturned the man's death sentence.) But in the unlikely event that the state doesn't appeal, it will then have 180 days to implement Judge Yohn's decision.

    Of course if the Third Circuit rules against Mumia, he will appeal to the Supreme Court. However, the odds for relief are small, given the increasingly reactionary nature of that court.

    Thus, Mumia's legal situation is extremely dangerous. His life truly is on the line, for no matter how the court rules, the only two choices under this legal system are either execution or life in prison without parole and, for the moment, the prosecution, with all its allies and backers, is fighting very hard for execution.

    THAT'S WHY WE ARE CALLING FOR ALL THOSE WHO POSSIBLY CAN TO COME OUT TO PHILADELPHIA WITH US ON THE 9TH. WE MUST STAY THE HANDS OF THE EXECUTIONERS AND PRY OPEN THE PRISON GATES FOR MUMIA'S RELEASE. FREE MUMIA! ABOLISH THE RACIST DEATH PENALTY!

    FREE ALL POLITICAL PRISONERS!
    www.freemumia.com
     
  2. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    in the first segment of LIKE IT S

    the frame up of the brother was discussed in detail by brother Barron, Milton Alimadi (Black Star news) and Les Payne, award winnig investigative journailst
     
  3. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    This is where the rubber meets the road

    Please send your positive vibes prayers and energy directed to Phllie to help this brother who has battled the "machine" for the sake of all black folks
     
  4. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    Hundreds of Abu-Jamal supporters gathered outside the federal courthouse in Philadelphia as the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments Tuesday over instructions given during his 1982 trial.
    www.washingtonpost.com
     
  5. jamesfrmphilly

    jamesfrmphilly going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    32,017
    Likes Received:
    11,483
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    retired computer geek
    Location:
    north philly ghetto
    Ratings:
    +13,745
    FYI

    Lawyer Michael Coard (left) and "Barrel of a Gun" director Tigre Hill debate the Mumia Abu-Jamal case at the National Constitution Center.
    http://media.philly.com/images/300*180/20101109_dn_g1npxmumi09c.JPG

    A raucous, overflow audience jeered both District Attorney Seth Williams and filmmaker Tigre Hill last night as they and two other participants conducted a firestorm debate over the Mumia Abu-Jamal case at the National Constitution Center.
    After it was over, lawyer and activist Michael Coard handed Hill a letter from Philadelphia lawyer David J. Wolfsohn demanding that he "immediately cease all screenings" of his new documentary about Mumia, "The Barrel of a Gun."

    After a screening of the movie before a standing-room crowd of about 250 people, Williams and Hill struggled to get their words out as the predominantly pro-Abu-Jamal audience shouted at them. One woman shouted that Hill was with the Fraternal Order of Police. Another belted: "Who paid you? Don't lie."

    The debate was supposed to be a presentation of the facts of the case. Today, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments on whether the jury in the Abu-Jamal case was given proper instruction on how to deliberate on a decision about the death penalty.

    "There will never be another trial," Williams said. "That is not what's being argued. The prosecution didn't make the case up."

    With Williams, Hill and Coard on stage last night was Baruch College history professor Johanna Fernandez, who co-produced "Justice on Trial," a pro-Abu-Jamal film. Fernandez questioned Williams about a "fourth man" who one of the witnesses had placed at the scene of the 1981 fatal shooting of Officer Daniel Faulkner.

    Fernandez and Coard raised a number of issues surrounding the case, including alleged evidence-tampering, a lack of a gunpowder test, poor representation, witness coercion and questionable testimonials.

    "One extreme says one thing and another says another," Williams said. "Everything was submitted to evidence. On December 9, 1981, he shot him." Williams added that he did not know why Abu-Jamal had not been tested for gunpowder residue.

    "It was clear Seth Williams doesn't know the details of the case," Fernandez said. "He was just spouting the rhetoric."

    In an interview afterward with the Daily News, Hill said the debate turned out just as he'd expected.

    "It's almost impossible to have a real debate, an intellectual one," Hill said. "I believe Michael Coard and Johanna Fernandez were taking it out of context."

    Hill said that Abu-Jamal's attorney did not believe in the "fourth-man" theory and that Abu-Jamal was going to argue self-defense, "which means he did it. I personally came to the conclusion that Mumia was guilty and had a fair trial."

    The letter handed to Hill by Coard says that "The Barrel of a Gun" has footage filmed by Hugh King, copyright owner of "Black and Blue," a documentary about police brutality containing an interview with Abu-Jamal that the letter claims also appears without permission in Hill's film.




    http://www.philly.com/dailynews/loc...e__more_like_a_jeer_summit.html#ixzz14ow9g6Yb
     
  6. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    what time will the decision come out?
     
  7. chuck

    chuck Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    13,485
    Likes Received:
    2,104
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +2,531
    Efforts in defense of the brother took place in front of the local federal courhouse(s) this afternoon...

    :fyi:
     
  8. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    Posted on Wed, Nov. 10, 2010



    Another hearing in Abu-Jamal saga
    By Nathan Gorenstein and Joseph A. Slobodzian

    Inquirer Staff Writers

    Mumia Abu-Jamal's latest chance to get off death row now depends on whether three federal appellate judges believe they can win a legal argument with the U.S. Supreme Court.
    In January, the high court vacated a 2008 decision throwing out Abu-Jamal's death sentence and ordered a new hearing.

    Tuesday, in a crowded federal courtroom, that hearing was convened. For an hour, lawyers for Abu-Jamal and the Philadelphia district attorney were peppered with questions by the three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. A decision is not expected before 2011.

    Abu-Jamal, convicted in the 1981 slaying of Police Officer Daniel Faulkner, remains in a state prison outside Pittsburgh and will likely stay behind bars for years because no matter what the judges decide, an appeal by one side or the other is a given.

    Abu-Jamal, 56, was not in court, but human drama presented itself directly behind the prosecution team, where the seats were filled with the wives and relatives of Philadelphia police officers slain in the line of duty.

    They included Maureen Faulkner, Daniel Faulkner's wife; Kimmy Pawlowski, whose husband, John, was killed in 2009; and Judith Cassidy, the widow of Officer Chuck Cassidy, slain in 2007.

    After the hearing, they and other relatives of slain officers called for Pennsylvania's death penalty to be overhauled so that those convicted of killing a police officer cannot avoid execution with interminable appeals.

    They spoke at Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 5 on Spring Garden Street. Also present were Amber Liczbinski, daughter of Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski; Michelle Liczbinski, the sergeant's widow; Megan McDonald, sister of Officer Patrick McDonald; and John Pawlowski, father of the slain officer.

    "The death penalty needs to be used in Pennsylvania and it needs to be applied if a police officer is gunned down strictly because he is a police officer," said Kimmy Pawlowski, who added: "Those who choose to wear the badge and serve our city should be protected by our system and the people of our city."

    Maureen Faulkner was at the point of tears as she started to speak. Her voice cracking, Faulkner said: "Put the man to death for what he's done. My husband was murdered in premeditation and malice on Dec. 9, 1981. Here I sit 30 years later in court.

    "It's become an absolute joke and it's got to stop. It really has to. . . . Every time we have to go into a courtroom, it is like a wound being ripped back open. It is so emotional for us." She married Faulkner 31 years ago Monday.

    Abu-Jamal's hearing opened with Judge Anthony J. Scirica noting what the panel would not do: It would not consider whether the 1982 Abu-Jamal jurors could have been confused by the written instructions when they sentenced Abu-Jamal to death rather than life in prison.

    The defense contends that the verdict instructions incorrectly implied that jurors could not consider mitigating evidence in favor of a life sentence unless there was a unanimous agreement for each factor.

    In 2008, Scirica and two fellow judges were persuaded of that point and vacated Abu-Jamal's death sentence, ordering a new penalty-phase trial. But the prosecution appealed and the decision was vacated by the high court.

    The federal judges in Philadelphia were told to rehear the case, and this time to decide it using as their guide a Supreme Court case that involved an Ohio man, Frank Spisak.

    The "Spisak ruling" essentially said that in all but the most egregious cases, confusing instructions on the use of mitigating factors were not grounds for overturning a death sentence and requiring a new trial to determine the penalty.
    Abu-Jamal attorney Judith L. Ritter, a professor at Widener Law School, argued that despite what the Supreme Court stated, the Spisak case "was very, very different."Hugh J. Burns Jr., chief of the district attorney's appellate unit, was sharply questioned by Judges Thomas L. Ambro and Robert Cowen as he argued that Abu-Jamal's case fit within the confines of Spisak.

    "You might be right, but there is a decent possibility . . . that you are wrong," Ambro told Burns at one point.

    If the court rules in Abu-Jamal's favor, Ritter said, a new jury would decide whether he would remain on death row or get life in prison. Ritter was a last-minute replacement at the oral argument for Abu-Jamal's longtime attorney, Robert Bryan, who last week said he had been receiving "threats" that Abu-Jamal supporters would publicly "embarrass" him. Bryan said he withdrew after being told that Abu-Jamal wanted him off the case.

    Outside the courtroom, about 500 supporters of Abu-Jamal demonstrated at Sixth and Market Streets. They included local residents and out-of-towners, among them students from Hunter College in New York City who attended with their professor as part of a history class on revolutionary history.

    Michael Schiffman, a teacher from the University of Heidelberg in Germany and author of a German book on the Abu-Jamal case, Race Against Death: Mumia Abu-Jamal, a Black Revolutionary in White America, also came. "The case is now evolving to its final stages," said Schiffman.

    Burns said after the hearing that no matter what happens, the case will go on for years.


    www.philly.com (no copyright)
     
  9. chuck

    chuck Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    13,485
    Likes Received:
    2,104
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +2,531
    Fear of a black revolution motives this:

    Let's be candid and honest about that too!
     
  10. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,007
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,015
    no lets be logical neither Mumia Abu Jamal or the MOVE group could have enacted or formented or starteda revolution any where

    This is an issue of a World Class which means more insightful and better then any white man,
    investigative journalist,
    going through hard economic times; and had a Black Flag operation pulled on him

    like "Mission Impossible", while he was driving a cab to feed his family

    This was a vendetta from the Phille plutocracy and the Secret society of police there

    and their filthy secrets in Phillie that he was revealing to the Black community
     
Loading...