6/12: Mobilization to Free Mumia Meeting, Update

- Need help 6/5
- Meeting 6/12


Dear Mumia Supporters,

You are invited to attend the next meeting of the Mobilization to Free
Mumia Abu-Jamal in SF:

Saturday, June 12th, 10:30 am
Mobe office: 298 Valencia St., at 14th St.
SF, CA

We will hear reports on the recent U.S. Supreme Court's decision not to
hear evidence in Mumia's case (info below if you missed last alert), plans
for a Book Reading for Mumia's new book on the history of the Black Panther
Party as well as other fundraising and educational events. Mumia continues
to be a leading voice in the struggles for freedom and peace around the
world. He needs our support more than ever as his case winds its way
through the Unjustice System. He is still on death row and the courts could
re-instate the death penalty portion of his unjust conviction!

Also - volunteers are needed to staff the Mobilization table and pass out
fact sheets on Mumia's case at the upcoming June 5th Demonstration against
invasions and occupations to be held in San Francisco. Gather at UN Plaza
at 11:00 am, look for the Mumia banners and signs. 415-255-1085

FREE MUMIA! ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY!


In solidarity,

Jeff Mackler and Laura Herrera, Co-coordinators
The Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal
298 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94103
415-255-1085
http://freemumia.org


----------------------------------------

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Writ of Certiorari for Mumia Abu-Jamal

BY JEFF MACKLER

On Monday, May 17, 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition by Mumia
Abu-Jamal for a writ of certiorari, a request that the court certify for a
hearing important points raised in Mumia's defense.

Several months earlier Mumia's legal team, headed by Robert R. Bryan, asked
the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in the normal appeals process and
consider two points that were rejected by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
The refusal to do so is not a decision on the merits of the issues raised
by Mumia but rather a decision to first have Mumia's federal appeal proceed
through the usual federal courts.

The first point in Mumia's petition asked the U.S. Supreme to overturn his
conviction based on the fact that the presiding judge in his 1982 murder
trial, Albert Sabo, expressed overtly racist comments as he was preparing
to judge Mumia's case. Proof of this assertion was provided to the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the form of a written affidavit signed by
award-winning court stenographer, Terri Maurer Carter. Carter, married to a
Pennsylvania policeman, affirmed that as she passed through Judge Sabo's
antechambers, she overheard Sabo state, in the presence of another judge
and in reference to Mumia's trial, "Yeah, and I'm going to help 'em fry the
nigger."

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected consideration of this evidence on
the specious grounds that the issue of Judge Sabo's racism had been
previously litigated by Mumia and was therefore not admissible because it
constituted "reopening" a point that had been previously closed.

The spurious nature of this decision is evidenced by the fact that the
Maurer Carter affidavit was submitted several years AFTER Mumia's original
charges against Sabo had been litigated. That is, at the time of the
original filings, the Terri Maurer Carter information did not exist.

Both Pennsylvania and federal courts have gone to incredible lengths to
avoid the simple fact that Judge Sabo, who has earned the reputation as a
"hanging judge" because he had sentenced more people to execution than any
other judge in the country, was a racist. A large majority of Sabo's
victims were Black. The 10,000 pages of trial record clearly indicate
racial prejudice. Eleven of fourteen Blacks were summarily removed from the
jury panel.

When Terri Maurer Carter's affidavit was originally submitted to
Pennsylvania Common Pleas Court Judge Pamela Dembe and then rejected, the
grounds were again incredible. Dembe argued that even if Judge Sabo's
remarks were clearly racist there was no evidence that Judge Sabo's rulings
during the trial were racist. Again, a perusal of the Sabo trial transcript
demonstrates that Judge Dembe was dead wrong in this instance as well.

The Maurer Carter affidavit was submitted in a timely manner. There is a
broad array of precedents for ordering a new trial when clear evidence of
racism is presented. In Mumia's case, the bending of the rules of law has
enabled one legal atrocity after another to be perpetrated in the name of
justice.

The highpoint in this charade was the statement of Federal District Court
Judge William H. Yohn Jr. who ruled that "innocence is no defense." The
ruling was in response to clear evidence produced by Mumia that he was not
and could not have been the person who murdered Police Officer Daniel
Faulkner on December 9, 1981. Yohn's logic held that innocence is trumped
by timeliness, that is, if the evidence is submitted beyond a statutory
deadline, even if conclusive, it is irrelevant. The legal process must
embody "finality" says the "law of the land" today, even if the final
result is the execution of an innocent man.

The second issue contained in Mumia's petition for a writ of certiorari
involved the refusal of Pennsylvania Supreme Court Judge Ronald Castille to
recuse (remove) himself from the panel of judges hearing Mumia's appeal.
Castille was a prosecutor in Mumia's original 1982 trial. The law holds
that the legal system must exclude the state serving as prosecutor and
judge in the same case. Again, the law was ignored in Mumia's case. It is
noteworthy that it was also Judge Castille, as State Attorney General, who
ordered the production of a training video instructing state prosecutors as
to how to remove Blacks from Pennsylvania juries. The "good" Judge Castille
believed that Blacks were less likely to convict in murder cases than
whites and therefore should be removed. Indeed, in Mumia's original trial
11 of 14 Blacks were peremptorily challenged and removed from consideration
as jurors.

The refusal of the U.S. Supreme Court to entertain Mumia's petition for a
writ of certiorari was not unusual. Most such petitions are denied as a
matter of course, with the court preferring to have outstanding issues
litigated by the federal courts.

But the nature of the constitutional issues raised in Mumia's petition were
far from routine. They pertain to the essence of justice itself, the right
to be judged by a person without prejudice, not to mention a judge who
enters the courtroom with a stated commitment to "fry the nigger." The same
holds for Ronald Castille, who served as prosecutor and juror/judge at the
same time, while establishing a clear record of racial bias to boot. Judge
Castille's name and the Pennsylvania State Seal appear on the opening
credits to the above-mentioned racist training tape that is today banned in
the state of Pennsylvania.

The U.S. Supreme Court's refusal to accept Mumia's petition for a hearing
must be rejected as a continuation of the racist bias that has permeated
every aspect of the proceedings against Mumia.

-------------------------------------------------------