|
.jpg)
Recent Similar ArticlesMumia:
|
National Lawyers Guild response to Mumia court decision
by
National Lawyer's Guild | 03.30.2008
New York. The National Lawyers Guild is gravely disappointed by the decision of the three-judge panel of the Appellate Court in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal v. Martin Horn. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, March 28, 2008 Contact: NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD DECRIES THIRD CIRCUIT DECISION IN Culture of Police Corruption and Judicial Bias Infected Trial and Appellate Proceedings New York. The National Lawyers Guild is gravely disappointed by the decision of the three-judge panel of the Appellate Court in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal v. Martin Horn. In a 118-page written decision, two of the three judges denied the defense’s Batson v. Kentucky claim, namely that the prosecution was motivated by racial discrimination when it struck blacks from the panel of prospective jurors. Dissenting from the opinion, Justice Thomas Ambro questioned why the court chose this case to announce a new procedural requirement and wrote that he would have ordered a hearing and required the prosecution to explain its challenges of black jury panelists. “It is merely to take the next step in deciding whether race was impermissibly considered during jury selection in his case,” he wrote. The court also ruled that the death penalty could not be reinstated unless a new penalty hearing is held within 180 days. Executive Director Heidi Boghosian said, “Yesterday’s decision is a somber reminder that the criminal justice system has been unable to eradicate the continuing impacts of racism. Despite evidence that racial bias influenced all stages of Mumia Abu-Jamal’s trial and appeals, an award-winning journalist has been denied the chance to prove the extent that overt racial animus colored his day in court.” From its inception, a climate of racial animosity within the Philadelphia criminal justice system has plagued the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. After a 1993 police corruption scandal in which 300 convictions were thrown out as improper, the Philadelphia District Attorney revealed that juries had routinely been selected with an eye toward excluding blacks. Numerous brutality suits and an FBI probe resulting in the conviction of thirty police officers for corruption greatly damaged the Police Department’s image. The 1985 police department bombing of the MOVE Organization’s West Philadelphia residence and the burning down of two city blocks, resulted in additional federal investigations into brutality and corruption. Earlier, in 1979, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against former police commissioner and then Mayor Frank Rizzo for police brutality, citing nearly 300 fatal police shootings of civilians in a three-year period. Amidst this culture of police corruption and brutality toward African-Americans, in 1982, Judge Albert Sabo, who issued Abu-Jamal’s death sentence and presided over his appeal, was overheard in chambers to have said “I’m going to help them fry the nigger.” Sabo was widely known as the “hanging judge” for sentencing 33 people to death (all but two of them persons of color), more than twice as many as any other sitting judge in the United States. Mumia Abu-Jamal is a Vice President of the National Lawyers Guild. Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association, which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.
|
|
© 1999–2008 Philadelphia Independent Media Center |
|
Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by PhillyIMC.
|
Comments
Sabo merely pronounced the
Submitted by rerun (not verified) on Mon, 03/31/2008 - 10:29pmSabo merely pronounced the sentence the jury unanimously arrived at.
Similarly, cases are randomly assigned to judges. Sabo had no control over Jamal's' or indeed any other defendant's'case being assigned to him.
Of course the Guild knows all this, or one hopes they do - they are lawyers.
I wonder if Jamal ever regrets his 'political trial' ploy. Twenty five years later he still isn't man enough to admit what he did.
Responce To Misinfornation
Submitted by SweetyD (not verified) on Mon, 04/14/2008 - 12:07pmSabo did not JUST PROnounce the sentence the jury unanimously arrived at.
Sabo had evreything to do with the jury arriving at their decision and sentence. He was biased from the beginning,a lifetime member of the FOP, a known prosrcutor's judge and he announced to them that he was "Going to Help" them "Fry the Nigger" !
Sabo lied when the defense wanted to call the police officer (Gary Wakshul) who stayed with Mumia at the hospital all night til around 10 the next morning, and reported that "the negro male made no comment" in his report. Sabo said that Officer Wakshul was on vacation.
Wakshul was not on vacation, Sabo did not want the jury to hear about Wakshul's statement on Dec.9, 1981 and months later after Mumia sued the police, Wakshul and other police said they forgot to mention that night, that they heard Mumia confess!
A 5th grader would have seen through that: much less a jury!
It was articles in the newspaper by reporters who are not usually favorable to Mumia. In reporting on the trial they commented on their astonishment of Sabo's blatant bias behavior in open court.
IF Sabo had no control on being assigned to Mumias trial case, he had control as to answer the call for him to recuse himself from the PCRAppeal. He refused to do it!
In refusing to recuse himself, he assigned himself to determined if he made any mistakes in Mumias case or deciding if he was biased in Mumias case. GUESS WHAT HIS REPLY WAS?
Question: Sabo, were yiu biased in Mumia's case?
Answer: NO
End of case. Regardless of proof. Oh!, thats right he would not allow any.
Would you admitt something that you did not do? That Sabo is the one who is not man enough,man enough to tell the truth. He knows if he aalows the truth he will not get the outcome he wants.
Harrisburg, PA
Post new comment