ONCE AGAIN, MUMIA IS BEING DENIED HIS COUNSEL OF  CHOICE AS NEW EVIDENCE EMERGES: NEW  DEVELOPMENTS IN LEGAL CASE

UPDATE: Nick Brown Admitted to Court to Serve as Counsel to Mumia

By Monica Moorehead

There have been important new legal developments in the  ongoing struggle to gain the freedom of award-winning  journalist and political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal, who has  been on Pennsylvania's death row since 1982.

Abu-Jamal faces a legal lynching for the Dec. 9, 1981,  murder of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner--a  murder that evidence suppressed by the authorities shows Abu- Jamal did not commit.

On June 7, Abu-Jamal's new defense attorneys, Marlene Kamish  and Eliot Grossman, notified the public and the media that  the Philadelphia district attorney's office is once again  violating their client's constitutional right to be  represented by the legal counsel of his choice.

In this particular incident, the legal counsel in question  is Nick Brown, a well-respected lawyer and barrister based  in London. Brown has been involved in hundreds of criminal  and civil cases. The Philadelphia district attorney's office  is challenging Brown's qualifications to serve in the  federal district court.

Kamish said: "It is indisputable that Nick Brown is  qualified to be a member of Mumia's defense team and to  appear before the court. In fact, it seems that the real  issue for the district attorney's office is that he is too  qualified."

AUTHORED FRIEND OF COURT BRIEF

Brown was the main author of an amicus or "friend-of-the- court" brief filed on Abu-Jamal's behalf last year. That  brief was signed by 22 members of the British Parliament.  The United States Eastern District Court in Pennsylvania  dismissed it with hardly an explanation.

This denial was reminiscent of what occurred during Abu- Jamal's original trial in 1982. Then the same district  attorney's office conspired with "hanging judge" Albert Sabo  to deny Abu-Jamal the right to have John Africa, leader of  the MOVE organization, sit with and legally advise him.

When Abu-Jamal tried to dismiss his state-appointed  attorney, Anthony Jackson, and legally represent himself, he  was physically removed from the court proceedings. This was  another blatant violation of Abu-Jamal's constitutional  rights.

During this sham of a trial, the district attorney's office  carried out a political attack on Abu-Jamal. It focused on  the African American revolutionary's role as a founding  member of the Philadelphia chapter of the Black Panther  Party in the late 1960s.

The district attorney took this tack because there was no  real evidence linking Abu-Jamal to the killing. That Abu- Jamal was sent to death row because of his political beliefs  is one of 29 constitutional violations perpetrated against  Abu-Jamal during the 1982 trial.

These violations were listed in the original federal habeas  corpus petition now before the Eastern District Court.

NO WORD ON NEW HEARING

Since the fall of 1999 Abu-Jamal has been awaiting word from  this court on whether he will be granted a hearing. His  right to an evidentiary hearing, which would allow evidence  suppressed during the original trial to finally be heard, is  at stake.

In response to this latest legal maneuver against Abu-Jamal,  Grossman said: "Opposition to motions for admission of  attorneys from outside a court's jurisdiction are almost  unheard of. If the DA's office is so sure of its case  against Mumia, why is it so concerned about who represents  him in a habeas corpus proceeding?"

In another important legal development, on May 29 in the  federal district court Abu-Jamal's lawyers filed two legal  briefs against Martin Horn, commissioner of the Pennsylvania  Department of Corrections, and Connor Blaine, superintendent  of the State Correction Institution at Greene, where Abu- Jamal is imprisoned.

One brief requests that the federal court accept two  affidavits signed by polygraph expert Dr. Charles Honts on  May 16 and May 18. These affidavits corroborate the results  of polygraph tests administered to Arnold Beverly, who  confessed to killing Faulkner as part of a mob hit.

Beverly also stated during these tests that Abu-Jamal was  innocent of the shooting.

The petition goes on to say that these tests should have  been presented by Abu-Jamal's prior legal counsel during the  state post-conviction proceedings in 1995 and 1996. On May  4, the day Abu-Jamal's new legal counsel was announced,  Beverly's affidavit was made public along with Abu-Jamal's  affidavit stating that he was innocent.

BRIEF ASKS STATE TO QUESTION CONFESSED KILLER

The second brief argues for a recommendation that a  deposition be taken of Beverly's testimony in order to  "preserve the evidence and protect the witness." The  petition states that "it is disingenuous for the District  Attorney to suggest that there is no emergency which  requires the prompt taking of Arnold Beverly's deposition."

The petition goes on to say that "if the District Attorney's  Office believed its own representations to the District  Court and the media that Mr. Beverly's confession is a  'patently outrageous story' and a 'lie,' they would welcome  rather than oppose being given the opportunity to cross- examine the witness under oath."

None of these significant legal developments has received  national media attention. This confirms the view that the  big-business media want to keep Abu-Jamal's case out of the  headlines because it is in the ruling class's interests to  portray Mumia as a "cop killer."

In fact, Abu-Jamal is a powerful and effective spokesperson  and activist against all forms of racist and class  oppression endemic to the capitalist system, here and  abroad. The media owners understand all too well how  vulnerable the United States is on the issue of racism.

What happens to him in the courts is important, but it would  be folly to rely on an unjust legal system to win his  freedom. This is very well understood by Abu-Jamal and his  lawyers.

Therefore, the progressive movement must continue to meet  the challenge of reaching out to the masses to build  necessary support.

A key point is that the case of Abu-Jamal is not about the  persecution of one individual. His case is political in  nature. It symbolizes the life-and-death struggle against  every form of racist oppression, especially those involving  police brutality and the death penalty.


UPDATE: Nick Brown Admitted to Court to Serve as Counsel to Mumia

July 11, 2001

PEACE AND POWER ALL!

ON JULY 5TH, 2001, JUDGE YOHN ISSUED AN ORDER THAT ADMITS BRITISH ATTORNEY NICK BROWN INTO FEDERAL COURT AS ONE OF MUMIA ABU JAMAL'S ATTORNEYS! THE PROSECUTION HAD USED ALL KINDS OF MACHINATIONS TO KEEP BROWN OUT; MANY THOUGHT IT WAS BECAUSE OF HIS LEGAL EXPERTISE. IT DIDN'T WORK. MORE DETAILS AS THEY ARE AVAILABLE.

FATIRAH

 

International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@iacenter.org
En Espanol: el_iac@yahoo.com
web: http://www.iacenter.org
CHECK OUT SITE    http://www.mumia2000.org
phone: 212 633-6646
fax:   212 633-2889
To make a tax-deductible donation,
go to   http://www.peoplesrightsfund.org

 

 

The International Action Center
Home      ActionAlerts     Press
Support the International Action Center