OCTOBER 18,1996 — THE DECREE — PAGE 5
Does justice system really protect us?
By GRANT LONG
Does the American justice sys
tem really protect those it says it
is suppose to serve? Are we re
ally innoccnt until proven guilty?
Can everyone in America go into
a court of law and honestly say
that they will receive a fair trial?
These are good questions that
I honestly cannot answer right
now. As for the American public,
the whole O.J. Simpson soap op
era of a trial changed the way
many Americans viewed the le
gal establishment. We know, or
like to think at least, that O.J. got
a fair trial, but does everybody
else? Before you come to a con
clusion, I want you to think about
why Dec. 9, 1981, was an impor
tant day in American legal his
tory.
Imagine that it is a cold De
cember night in Philadelphia. In
the early morning hours of Dec.
9, 1981, a police officer, Daniel
Faulkner, is gunned down and so
is a cab driver Mumia Abu-Jamal.
But what is so weird about
this? There is always some shoot
ing or some type of illegal activ
ity going on in a big city like
Philadelphia. But the only reason
why Mumia Abu-Jamal stopped
his cab was to help his brother
who was being beaten by officer
Faulkner. After this encounter the
details of the case start to become
unclear.
In the ensuing moments officer
Faulkner was fatally shot four
times and Abu-Jamal was shot
once in the chest. Although there
was little evidence that suggests
Abu-Jamal was the trigger man
in the shooting, he was arrested
and charged with the murder of
officer Faulkner.
Usually the death of a cop is
taken very seriously in legal
circles and the accused has a mini
mal chance of winning the case.
In Abu-Jamal’s case this could
never be more true. The Consti
tution may say that you are inno
cent until proven guilty, but the
deck was stacked against Abu-
Jamal from day one.
For starters the judge that
heard his case, Albert Sabo, has
put more people on death row
than any other judge in the his
tory of American justice. Sec
ondly Abu-Jamal’s attorneys only
had $1,000 to conduct research
for his case, not nearly enough
money to conduct a proper de
fense investigation.
The jury was also poorly se
lected. In a city that is 40 percent
African-American, there was only
one African-American juror dur
ing the trial. Plus you must throw
in the fact that the .38 caliber
handgun that Abu-Jamal had in
his possession was not tested cor
rectly by ballistics experts. Judge
Sabo also ignored the fact that a
.44 caliber gun was used to kill
officer Faulkner, while Abu-
Jamal only owned a .38.
There was also testimony that
was suppressed by four eyewit
nesses who saw a man with
dreadlocks run from the scene of
the crime. The star witness for
the prosecution was a prostitute
Opinion
who cut a deal with the police
that if she testified for the state
they would continue to let her
practice her trade.
One of the more ironic tidbits
of information that was discussed
during the trial was Judge Sabo’s
affiliation with the Fraternal Or
der of Police. Judge Sabo was
not a member at the time, but his
link with them could have led to
a biased opinion on his part.
Another thing that was held
against Abu-Jamal in his trial was
his past, or some like to say his
radical past. At the age of 14 he
was under surveillance by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation
because he was the minister of
information for the Philadelphia
branch of the Black Panther Party.
When J. Edgar Hoover
launched his COINTELPRO op
eration in the late 60’s Abu-Jamal
was on his enemies of the state
list. For those who do not know
what COINTELPRO was, it was
an F.B.I. operation to get rid of
all the supposed enemies of the
state, but basically it was an F.B.I.
witch hunt to get back at 60’s
radicals.
During the 70’s Abu-Jamal
became a journalist and exposed
the brutality of the Philadelphia
police force. It was also during
this time that he was seen as a
menace to the Philadelphia power
structure, especially by people
like Frank Rizzo, then mayor of
Philadelphia. Even though they
say we are innocent until proven
guilty, Abu-Jamal’s political past
hindered the outcome of the ver
dict of his trial.
It is now crystal clear that
Mumia Abu-Jumal was found
guilty of the murder of officer
Daniel Faulkner, and that he was
sentenced to die. But then again
what could he do? The prosecu
tion stacked the deck against him
and what else could he do, but
fold. Right there is where the case
would have ended for most
people.
1 mean, sure he would prob
ably sit on death row for another
15 to 16 years while his case
would have gone through the very
lengthy and monotonous appeals
process where the justice system
would have played a craps game
with the rest of his life and then
eventually sent him to the elec
tric chair to die. But it was Mumia
Abu-Jamal who had the last laugh
because he proved that the pen is
mightier than the sword.
The state of Pennsylvania
thought it had the last laugh when
they incarcerated Abu-Jamal, but
they forgot that he can write and
that is exactly what he did. In
prison he wrote “Live From Death
Row,” and got his message out to
the public. In his text the author
talks about his trial and his life
before and after the shooting of
officer Faulkner.
This book finally opened the
public’s eye to the plight of
Mumia Abu-Jamal. His attorney,
now Leonard Weinglass, is ac
tively seeking to get him pardoned
or at least to have his case retried.
Weinglass does know that he is
facing an uphill battle.
In an interview with Nation
Journal he says, “We are up
against a well-orchestrated, well-
organized, well-financed cam
paign to see to it that Mumia is
executed.”
Weinglass’s and Abu-Jamal’s
cries have not gone unheard, there
has been a mass movement that
has taken up their cause, even
such people as Ed Asner, Whoopi
Goldberg, KRS ONE, and Mike
Farrell, among others, are begin
ning to chant the phrase “Free
Mumia ”
Although Mumia Abu-Jamal
is just one of the many people
who have gotten shafted by our
legal system, can we honestly ask
ourselves with a straight face does
our legal system work? Of course
the answer is a resounding no,
and if you believe that American
justice works, then I wouldn’t be
surprised if you believed the earth
was still flat too.
I’ll be the first person to admit
that American Justice does work,
but only if you have money to
pay for it. Just ask Orenthal James
Simpson; it cost him about three
to four million to get the system
off his back. But how many
people can afford to pay Johnnie
Cochrane’s legal fees?
It is a shame that we have a
document like the Constitution
and most Americans don’t even
know what it means. The only
thing they know is the first and
26th amendments. Well I have
news for you people: there are 25
others worth knowing. The Con
stitution is the basis for all laws
in our land, but instead of read
ing this, people go to attomeys
and pay them for the constitu
tional rights that are already
granted them as American citi
zens.
It is time for Americans to
open their eyes to what is going
on within the American legal
structure and realize that unless
you can go to the ATM machine
and get out a million or two for a
trial, you don’t stand a chance in
the court of law. Until the legal
system truly works for all Ameri
cans 1 will continue to chant “Free
Mumia.”
m ills!!
,1
avwsiTO!
toOSHoHcm!
m'n
00^,
5
CUtP
CUM
Reporters
wanted!
Anyone interested in writ
ing for The Decree, please
contact Editor Jessica Brown
at 5328.
No experience necessary.