A Supreme Court blow to Mumia Abu-Jamal

[Hampton]

The Supreme Court on Tuesday reversed an appeals court ruling that would have given Mumia Abu-Jamal a chance to avoid the dealth penalty. Some opponents of capital punishment have championed Abu-Jamal's case.

By Warren Richey (http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/About/Contact/Staff-Writers/Warren-Richey) Staff writer
posted January 19, 2010 at 2:05 pm EST
Washington —

Mumia Abu-Jamal, whose death sentence for killing a Philadelphia police officer in 1981 has become an international cause célèbre for opponents of capital punishment, has suffered a significant setback at the US Supreme Court.

In a summary order issued on Tuesday, the high court reversed a 2008 federal appeals court ruling that had required a new sentencing hearing for Mr. Abu-Jamal.


The Supreme Court action sends the case back to the Third US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia to reconsider the issue in light of a similar decision handed down last week by the high court. In that case, with similar facts, the justices voted 9 to 0 to reverse an order that struck down the death sentence.


Tuesday’s action by the Supreme Court likely moves Abu-Jamal significantly closer to execution.


Abu-Jamal’s writings about his legal plight have attracted widespread attention among human rights activists and capital punishment opponents in the US and Europe. He has maintained that the police coerced witnesses to testify against him and that racial prejudice and discrimination played a role in his death sentence.

This week, supporters began circulating a petition to President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder calling for an investigation into the “long history of civil rights and constitutional violations in this case.”http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print/274655

[The Feral Underclass]

Shit, that really sucks. Obama is never gonna listen.

[MarxSchmarx]

Crap. In retrospect, what is striking is that the defense used Mills v. Maryland as the basis for a new sentencing hearing.

There is a real legal question about whether or not the jurors felt there had to be unanimity over the mitigating factors in order to be able to raise them. I tend to doubt this was an issue in the Abu-Jamal trial - in fact, considering everything else, this seems a little strange to raise this as a reason for a new trial.

Having said that, I realize these are uber-seasoned defense attorneys and I understand why we can't second guess them. But still, from what I know about the case (and I've read a lot), on legal grounds Smith v. Spisak sets the precedence under which the Abu-Jamal case is legally decided. The decision in Smith v. Spisak is in keeping with the general deference to juries granted in the appeals courts, and as such the defense, based on Mills v. Maryland, was rather flimsy to begin with.

[ls]

Shit, that really sucks. Obama is never gonna listen.

How on earth could you imagine he would even for a second. If he was seen getting Mumia off, then he'd get loads of shit from the racist press, his party and everyone else, it's literally impossible that he'd do this. Not that he wants to because we all know he's a racist chauvinist anyway.

[Hampton]

While I hold no belief that Obama or Holder or anyone else in his administration cares one bit about Mumia, beside perhaps the fact that he might be used to show how he is "tough on crime" or some other played out political jargon, the idea that his execution is still a real possibility. His case will go back to court and he will be re-sentenced, again, It's either the death penalty or life in prison.

Philadelphia got its first black District Attorney recently, he vowed to sign Mumia's death warrant if he was elected, which he was. I have no faith in the system so the only thing to do is to organize, organize, organize.

[KurtFF8]

Shit, that really sucks. Obama is never gonna listen.

In all fairness, this wasn't a decision by Obama or his administration but the conservative Supreme Court.

But this is still a clear sign of the State doing its dirty deeds.

Also this week: the Supreme Court ruled against corporate limits on spending for political campaigns. What a great system "for the people" the US has, eh?

[BOZG]

Statement from his legal team:


Legal Update

Date: January 19, 2010
From: Robert R. Bryan, lead counsel
Subject: Mumia Abu-Jamal, death row, Pennsylvania

United States Supreme Court decision, etc.

United State Supreme Court This morning the U.S. Supreme Court issued the long-awaited ruling in the case of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, which we have been litigating for 15 months. The decision was as we expected. Mumia's case has been sent back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia, for further proceedings consistent with the decision last weak in another case:

“The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit for further consideration in light of Smith v. Spisak, 558 U.S. ___ (2010).”

The decision was unavoidable in view of the Spisak case ruling and is not bad. Now we must go back to litigating the issue of the death penalty in the lower federal court. It previously ruled that the trial judge misled the jury and thus Mumia was entitled to a new jury trial on the issue of death or life. That is still the issue. What occurred in Mumia's case is different both procedurally and factually from the jury instructions in Spisak. The prosecution disagrees.

Soon I will be posting more information on our website: http://www.MumiaLegalDefense.org. That may
checked regularly for updated information.

Petition for President Barack Obama It is crucial for people to sign the petition for President Barack Obama regarding Mumia, which is in 10 languages (“Mumia Abu-Jamal and the Global Abolition of the Death Penalty”). Please circulate the petition as widely as possible, and of course sign. The link is: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/Mumialaw/petition.html.

Over 8,000 people, mostly from Germany, have signed in the recent days since we launched the petition. These include: Günter Grass, Germany (Nobel Prize in Literature); Bishop Desmond Tutu, South Africa (Nobel Peace Prize); Danielle Mitterrand, Paris (former First Lady of France); Fatima Bhutto, Pakistan (writer); Noam Chomsky, MIT (philosopher & author); Ed Asner (actor; Mike Farrell (actor); and Michael Radford (director of the Oscar winning film Il Postino).

There is a Facebook page for Mumia: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=407654295516&ref=mf

Conclusion Mumia remains on death row under a death judgment. He is in greater danger than at any time since his arrest over 28 years ago. The prosecution has said it will continue pursuing his execution. I win cases, and will not let them kill my client.

Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117

Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal

[Communist]

.
Ellison considers resolution in support of Mumia Abu-Jamal (http://minnesotaindependent.com/56451/ellison-considers-resolution-in-support-of-mumia-abu-jamal)

By Jon Collins 3/17/10

U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., isn’t afraid to speak his mind.

He was bold enough to show up at a speaking event of former Black Panther Dhoruba Bin Wahad at Walker Church in South Minneapolis late last month. And after he was called on by Wahad, Ellison went toe-to-toe with the former political prisoner, eventually promising the crowd he’d consider a congressional resolution questioning the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal — who was convicted of murdering a Philadelphia policeman in 1982, although supporters say he didn’t receive a fair trial.

It was an often contentious half-hour dialog that spanned topics from the occupation of Palestine to Jim Crow laws.

After urgings from the sometimes restless crowd, Ellison said he hadn’t previously considered a congressional resolution in support of Abu-Jamal.

“You asked me about Mumia Abu-Jamal. You put something on my mind tonight,” Ellison told the crowd. “You want something done on Mumia Abu-Jamal: Let’s begin that conversation.”

After a long appeal process, the Supreme Court ruled that Abu-Jamal’s conviction could stand last year.

But the main thrust of the debate between Ellison and Wahad revolved around the best method to create social change. Wahad argued that social change comes from actively confronting oppression instead of working in the system.

“Is working to change the system with good intentions futile — yes,” Wahad said during the debate. “I don’t like tyrants, I don’t like oppressors — that’s why I spent 19 years in prison.”
Mumia Abu-Jamal. Photo: Wikipedia

Mumia Abu-Jamal. Photo: Wikipedia

Ellison said people fighting for social change need to get comfortable with acquiring some power.

“You correctly identify American foreign policy as a very dangerous thing for people all over the world — I think you’re right about that,” Ellison told Wahad. “You want to promote cynicism and I’m trying to promote positive social change and economic change for people.”

Ellison said there’s a broad dissatisfaction across racial lines in the United States and that Wahad’s rhetoric created barriers to real social change.

“[It's not productive] to argue there’s some impenetrable barrier between people of different racial groups,” Ellison told the crowd. “The fact is that there’s always been, I think you would agree, a number of interracial collections of people fighting oppression.”

Wahad’s speech was titled, “Political repression and state violence from Minneapolis to Palestine.” He was released from prison after an appeal found prosecutors withheld evidence.

According to the introduction, the event was sponsored by Communities United Against Police Brutality and the RNC8 Defense Committee, which supports eight Minneapolis activists who are facing felony conspiracy charges from their arrests before the Republican National Convention in 2008.

“I’ll get word back to you” on the possible Abu-Jamal resolution, Ellison told the crowd.


.