On December 9th, 1981, Mumia Abu-Jamal murdered 25-year-old Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner. On July 3rd, 1982, Mr. Jamal was convicted of first-degree murder, and sentenced to death. This document details the main issues regarding this case. It is intended to give the reader a general understanding of the substantive issues regarding the case against Mumia Abu-Jamal. The information shown here comes directly from the trial transcripts and the original statements given to police.
According to Mr. Jamal, he spent his youth as an "apprentice in revolutionary journalism" for the Black Panther Party. The Panther's were a group that, along with their legitimate "social work," advocated violence, kidnapping, drug dealing and murder, as appropriate methods of response to perceived government and police oppression. Having completed his Panther training, Jamal rose to the rank of Lieutenant Minister of Information, for the Pantherıs Philadelphia Chapter. Mr. Jamal later became a local reporter at NPR affiliate station, WUHY-FM, (now WHYY) in Philadelphia.
NOTE: Along with
millions of others, it appears that the Mumia propaganda machine
duped us too. When we first went on line, based on the
information we collected while researching this issue, which
included articles written by Jamal's supporters, we had stated,
"Mumia Abu-Jamal was a longstanding critic of the
Philadelphia Police Department." However, since our
initial posting of this site, we have been contacted by several
credible sources, including Pulitzer Prize winning author Buzz
Bissinger and various reporters who worked for local Philadelphia
newspapers in 1981. These individuals have informed us,
that Mumia Abu-Jamal was known in Philadelphia's inner city for
his reports on social issues, but he was not
In his article, The Guilty and the
Dead, Buzz Bissinger states, that William Marimow, who shared in
a Pulitzer Prize for public service in 1978 for his reporting on
police abuses in Philadelphia, and who is now the managing editor
of the Baltimore Sun, told him, "I was very attuned to
everyone who wrote about Philadelphia police violence. This
guy [Jamal] didn't register a blip on my radar screen."
Mr. Jamal's journalistic prowess regarding police issues in 1981
has little to do with this case, other than the fact, that his
attorneys had always suggested he was "targeted by
police" because he was a constant nuisance to them, and
because he had "exposed"
In 1981, Mr. Jamal was an avid supporter of a militant anti-government, anti-police group, known as MOVE. Founded and headed by a man named John Africa, MOVE was headquartered in Philadelphiaıs Center City. Most MOVE members lived together in a single row home. For several years preceding the murder of Officer Faulkner, MOVE's members had been in constant conflict with their neighbors, as well as various Philadelphia City officials. Based on comments made by residents who lived adjacent to the MOVE home in 1978, Move's members would allow mountains of trash to pile up in front of their home, attracting vermin to the neighborhood. They also threw buckets of human waste from their windows and used a loudspeaker system to blast the militant doctrine of John Africa from their windows around the clock.
In 1978, after repeated requests from their neighbors and having already received several citations for serious health code violations, the Philadelphia Police Department attempted to evict the MOVE clan from their rented home. As they did, a lengthy and violent gun battle broke out. When the shooting stopped, Police Officer James Ramp had been killed. Nine MOVE members were tried for Officer Ramp's murder. All were convicted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms.
The trial and the sentences handed down for Officer Ramp's murder enraged Mr. Jamal. He used his position at the radio station to attack the Philadelphia Police Department, its chief and the city's Mayor, Frank Rizzo. According to Mr. Jamal's friends and co-workers, he openly began to espouse the teachings of John Africa while at work. Due to his outspoken and inflammatory rhetoric and numerous work related violations, Jamal was fired from his radio job at WUHY-FM. For the next several years, Mr. Jamal failed to find new employment in local media. As stated by many of his colleagues, by 1981 he had become a local media pariah.
On the night he murdered Officer Daniel Faulkner, Mumia Abu-Jamal had not worked as a reporter for an extended period of time, and was working as a cab driver to make ends meet.
The trial of Mumia Abu-Jamal began with jury selection in June of 1982. Initially, Jamal was to be represented not by a Public Defender, but instead by a court appointed attorney who was in private practice. Mr. Jamal was given the opportunity to offer his personal input into the selection of the attorney, who would defend his life in the courtroom. The record reflects that Jamal personally interviewed several prospective attorneys and finally suggested that Anthony Jackson be selected as his defense counsel.
Anthony Jackson was fully qualified to represent Mumia Abu-Jamal, and came highly recommended by Jamal's friends. Prior to graduating from the prestigious University of Pennsylvania Law School, Mr. Jackson had worked "as an evidence examiner for the Philadelphia Police Department," and admittedly gained an in depth knowledge of legal science and technology. In addition, Mr. Jackson had worked as a private investigator and, for a short time, as an Assistant District Attorney in Philadelphia.
Prior to taking on Jamal's case, Anthony Jackson had previously represented no less than 20 defendants accused of first-degree murder. Of those cases, he had lost only 6. Additionally, prior to the Jamal case, Mr. Jackson had never had a client sentenced to Death. Immediately before he assumed control of the Jamal case in January 1982, Mr. Jackson was working with an organization known as "Philcop." This organization represented claimants and instructed attorneys in how to file personal injury (police brutality) lawsuits against the Philadelphia Police Department for various alleged abuses.
Prior to the 1982 trial Anthony Jackson was settling into his new role as an attorney in private practice. Initially, he had no office or secretary. However, he states by January 1982 he had opened his doors for business. Mr. Jackson has stated under oath, that he began to work on Mr. Jamal's defense beginning in early January 1982, roughly 6 months prior to the beginning of the trial.
The trial record reflects, that the court initially allocated roughly $13,000 to pay Mr. Jackson for his services, and for investigative costs. The court later allocated an additional amount, in excess of $1,400, to hire investigative experts in Jamal's behalf. Mr. Jackson has acknowledged, that he also received additional funding from Jamal's friends and family, but he refused to disclose the amount of that sum while being questioned in 1995.
On May 13, 1982, only a few weeks before the trial began, Mr. Jamal suddenly and unexpectedly decided to remove Mr. Jackson as counsel, and he personally took control of his own defense. According to Mr. Jackson, Jamal's decision to proceed in the trial "pro se," was brought about by Mr. Jamal's perception that Jackson was ineffective, in attaining adequate funding from the court to pay for outside assistance. Mumia Abu-Jamal took physical control of all the witness statements, and various other important documents and he began to defend himself from his cell. While testifying at the 1995 PCRA hearing, Anthony Jackson stated that when Judge Sabo re-instated him as lead counsel on the second day of the trial, Jamal failed to return many of these statements to him, further hampering his efforts to mount a defense in his behalf.
Mumia Abu-Jamal represented himself at his preliminary hearing. In May 1982, Mumia Abu-Jamal was again permitted to represent himself, with the assistance of Anthony Jackson, before Judge Albert Sabo at the Motion to Suppress. At this hearing, Jamal extensively questioned several witnesses, some of whom would later testify against him later, at the actual trial.
Unlike most trials, the jury selection process (voir dire) in Jamal's trial was quite eventful. In fact, it set the tone for the rest of the trial itself, and was a preview of things to come. Jury selection began in June of 1982. Mr. Jamal again represented himself in this phase of the trial. Over the course of two days, he personally questioned 20 prospective jurors. By the end of the second day of jury questioning, 1/3 of the available jury pool had been questioned and only 1 of the required 12 jurors and alternates had been selected. Many that attended the 1982 trial felt Mr. Jamal's general appearance, demeanor in the courtroom and style of questioning, were perceived as threatening by the prospective jurors. To evidence this, the court record for 6-8-82 reflects that when asked if she felt uneasy while being questioned by Mr. Jamal, one of prospective jurors, Ruth Swank, stated that Jamal's questioning of her "scares me to death" (6-2-82, T.R. 2.138). Other prospective jurors echoed similar concerns.
It was at this point that Prosecutor Joe McGill suggested to Judge Albert Sabo that the court (Judge Sabo himself) assume the jury questioning, for both the prosecution and the defense, from that point forward. This was well within the legal guidelines of Pennsylvania State law in 1982, which clearly stated that the court might at any time and for any reason assume the jury selection process. Judge Sabo openly acknowledged that the jury selection process was taking far too long. He also noted, that it was his observation many of the jurors appeared to be adversely effected by Mr. Jamal's questioning. He further stated, that there was a distinct possibility if Mr. Jamal continued, that the entire jury pool might be used up without seating the necessary 12 jurors and alternates.
The record reflects, that during a side bar conference to discuss this matter, Jamal, who was still representing himself at this point, became agitated by Judge Sabo's comments and began to shout at him. Jamal stormed away from the side bar conference, ordering Anthony Jackson, who was functioning as "back up" counsel, "not to participate in the proceedings at all." It was at this point that Mumia Abu-Jamal first demanded to have John Africa, the founder of MOVE, and a non-lawyer, "represent him," and question the prospective jurors in his behalf. Jamal stated:
"I don't want him [Anthony Jackson] to conduct the voir dire (jury selection) for me and I don't want you [Judges Sabo] to do it for me. I want John Africa." (6-9-82, T.R.3.33)
Judge Sabo offered Mr. Jamal the opportunity to review the questions proposed by the prosecution and Jamal refused to look at them. He also refused to offer any questions of his own, and he instructed Jackson not to look at the questions placed before them by Judge Sabo. At this point, Mr. Jamal stated that he considered court-conducted voir dire (jury selection) "a damned farce." Because of these actions, Judge Sabo chose to conduct the questioning of the next 12 perspective jurors, until lunch recess.
Following lunch, having quieted Jamal, Anthony Jackson stepped in and offered an impassioned and compelling argument, persuading Judge Sabo to take a more moderate course than the one offered by Mr. McGill. Based on Mr. Jackson's argument, Judge Sabo agreed to allow Mr. Jamal to personally develop the questions to be asked of each prospective juror. Then, the formally trained and experienced, Anthony Jackson, would ask these questions in Jamal's behalf. Once the responses were heard, Judge Sabo permitted Mr. Jackson to approach Mr. Jamal and confer with him. The record reflects, that Jamal was then permitted to personally decide each of the following questions: if one of his 20 preemptory challenges should be used to strike the prospective juror, if the defense should challenge the prospective juror for cause, or if they should accept the prospective juror. In addition to protecting Mr. Jamal from being judged by a jury that had antagonistic feelings towards him, Judge Sabo stated, that he felt this process would sufficiently speed the jury selection process.
This approach was acceptable to everyone involved, Sabo, Jackson and McGill. Sabo asked Mr. Jamal if he felt Mr. Jackson had misrepresented his wishes, and Jamal refused to respond. His silence was noted as an affirmation and the court record clearly reflects that this is how the rest of the jury selection process was completed.
Judge Sabo's process did speed the selection to a normal pace, and within a few days a jury of 12, plus the necessary alternates, was seated. Through this process, Mr. Jamal was personally allowed to select his own jury. The record clearly shows, that Mumia Abu-Jamal determined how each of his 20 preemptory challenges was used, challenged numerous jurors "for cause," and agreed to the individuals who were eventually seated to judge him.
When the jury was seated, Jamal had used each of his 20 preemptory challenges, while the Prosecution had used just 15 of theirs. The jury that was selected to hear the case was made up of both men and women and had an initial racial makeup of 3 blacks and 9 whites. (Early in the trial, both, the Prosecution and the Defense, would agree to dismiss one of the 3 black jurors, Jennie Dawley, for violating sequestration when she left the hotel to attend to a sick cat.) In addition to verifying that the first two jurors seated were black, the record also verifies that the Prosecution approved a fourth black juror (Mr. James Burgess). However, Mr. Jamal, while representing himself, chose to "remove" Mr. Burgess, with one of his peremptory challenges.
The Prosecution's case against Mumia Abu-Jamal was three pronged. First, there were 4 eyewitnesses to the crime who stated that Jamal was the killer. Second, there was significant scientific and ballistic evidence pointing to Mr. Jamal's guilt. Finally, there were three individuals who heard Mr. Jamal shout out two self-incriminating statements immediately outside the hospital Emergency Room. By any standard, the amount of evidence against Mr. Jamal was considerable.
The defense, on the other hand, failed to present a case pointing to Jamal's innocence. Had Jamal been innocent, their most logical exculpatory eyewitness, (other than Jamal himself) was William Cook, who, in addition to being the driver of the car Officer Faulkner pulled over that morning, was Mumia Abu-Jamal's brother. Mr. Cook was seen by several witnesses to have been only a few inches away from Officer Faulkner, when he was shot. Yet the defense, which included Mr. Jamal working in consort with Mr. Jackson, chose not to have William Cook take the stand in his brother's behalf in 1982. Mumia Abu-Jamal too, refused to take the stand to proclaim his innocence and explain what had occurred on December 9th. Additionally, the defense never called George Fassnacht, their ballistics expert, to testify in 1982. Nor did they ever request the representation of a forensic pathologist at trial.
The burden of proof obviously fell to the prosecution. Therefore, in 1982, the Defense focused their efforts on casting doubt on the accuracy of the testimony offered by the prosecution witnesses, by pointing out the apparent discrepancies in their testimony as it compared to their original statements, and by hammering away at their credibility, based on their personal backgrounds. (One prosecution witness was a prostitute, another, had a conviction for arson, a crime he committed, when he was 18 years old.)
At the 1982 trial, four (4) eyewitnesses, none of who knew each other prior to the shooting and each of who was deemed to have testified credibly by the court, have stated that they witnessed the following sequence of events:
At 3:51:08 AM on December 9th, 1981, Officer Faulkner pulled a Volkswagen over for driving the wrong way down a one way street with itıs lights off.
William Cook, Mumia Abu Jamalıs brother, was driving the vehicle. He exited the car and shortly thereafter several witnesses saw him attack Officer Faulkner, punching Faulkner in the face.
Several eyewitnesses saw Mumia Abu-Jamal running across the street towards the scene with his arm raised. Prior to the police stop of his brother, Jamal was coincidentally sitting in his cab across the street in a parking lot.
From less than two feet away, Jamal fired a shot, which hit Officer Faulkner in the back.
Faulkner was able to remove his revolver, turn and fire one shot at his attacker. The bullet found its mark in Mumia Abu Jamalıs chest.
The wounded Faulkner then fell to the ground.
Jamal stood over the unarmed officer and fired several additional shots at Faulknerıs upper body.
Jamal then took the time to bend down, put the barrel of his gun inches away from Officer Faulknerıs face and fire the final and fatal shot, killing him instantly.
Jamal then staggered several steps and collapsed on the curb.
Moments later, police apprehended Jamal, his gun at his side, only a few feet from Officer Faulknerıs body. They then placed him in the back of a police van.
As stated earlier, the Prosecution presented four eyewitnesses to the murder of Officer Daniel Faulkner at the 1982 trial (Robert Chobert, Michael Scanlon, Cynthia White and Albert Magilton).
NOTE: Subsequently,
a fifth eyewitness was brought forward by the defense
NOTE: The defense
has recently tried to state that four additional
individuals were actual eyewitnesses to the murder (William
Singletary, Desie Hightower, Veronica Jones and Debra Kordansky).
The record reflects that though each of these individuals was
close to the area of the shooting that morning, only Mr.
Singletary has ever stated that he witnessed the actual shooting.
Of Mr. Singeltary, Leonard Weinglass Jamal's current attorney
said, "We believe his recollection of the events that
morning are not entirely accurate." Each of the other three
witnesses has stated that they came on the scene well "after
the shooting had ceased," and that they "never saw the
officer actually shot."
Eyewitness Robert Chobert
Twenty-two year old Robert Chobert was a cab driver, parked directly behind Officer Faulkner's patrol car, just two car lengths away from where he fell. Only moments after the shooting, Robert Chobert physically identified Mumia Abu-Jamal as the killer, and was then transported to Philadelphia's main police station, the "Round House," arriving there at 4:15 AM.
At 4:25 AM, just 35 minutes after the shooting, Mr. Chobert gave his statement to police. He stated:
"I was writing down on a pad how much my fare was. Then I heard a shot. I looked up and I saw a cop who was on the pavement next to his car, his car was parked a little in front of my car. I saw the cop fall to the ground when I looked up and I saw this black male stand over the cop and shoot him a couple of more times. Then I saw the black male start running towards 12th St. He didn't get very far, maybe thirty or thirty-five steps and then he fell. I got out of my cab and started walking over to the cop. When I got up to him all of the sudden all of the cops came and told me to get back. Then I got back in my cab and I was getting ready to leave, but they had me blocked in." (Chobert Statement, 12-9-81)
Mumia Abu-Jamal was found with a gun at his side, in the exact spot that Mr. Chobert said the killer fell. Mr. Chobert further stated, that there was a second man at the scene, William Cook. In his written statement to police, when asked what happened to this man, Mr. Chobert said, "I saw another guy running, but the police got him too." (Chobert Statement, 12-9-81) Robert Chobert clearly states, that both the man who killed Faulkner (Jamal) and the man who had been in from of the car with Officer Faulkner before the shooting started, (Cook) had been captured.
At the Motion to Suppress, while being questioned by Jamal, who was acting as his own attorney at the time, Mr. Chobert is asked:
Jamal, "You did see the cop
being shot- the man shoot the cop?"
Chobert- "Yeah, I said I did didn't I."
Jamal- "Well, you sure did. And you saw me in the back of
the wagon didn't you?"
Chobert- "Yes, I did."
Jamal- "What made you certain it [I] was the same man?"
Chobert- "Because I saw you, buddy. I saw you shoot
him!"
Jamal- "You saw me-"
Chobert- I saw you shoot him, and I never took my eyes off you
until you got in the back of the wagon. (6-2-82, TRIAL RECORD
PG. 2.74-5)
At the 1982 trial, Mr. Chobert's testimony was as follows:
"I heard a shot. I looked up, I saw a cop fall to the ground, and then I saw Jamal standing over him and firing some more shots into him. Then I saw him [Jamal] walking back about ten feet and he just fell by the curb." (6-19-82, TRIAL RECORD PG. 210-211)
The jury heard about Mr. Chobert's discrepancy in the distance that he had originally stated Jamal "ran," as it compared to his testimony. While cross-examining Mr. Chobert, Jamal's attorney repeatedly questioned him about the fact that he had altered this detail in his story. Chobert stood up to this blistering cross-examination and stated, "I know who shot the cop and I ain't going to forget it." (6-19-82, T.R.27)
Eyewitness Michael Scanlon
Michael Scanlon was a businessman from out of state, who was visiting Philadelphia on December 9, 1981. At 3:52 AM on December 9, 1981, having just dropped off a friend at his apartment, Mr. Scanlon was returning to his hotel. While waiting for the light to change, he was sitting stationary at the intersection of 13th St. and Locust, roughly 100 feet from the shooting. Michael Scanlon watched the entire murder unfold before him. He then "turned left up 13th to look for help." He returned to the crime scene a short time later to give a statement to police.
In that statement, given at 4:24 AM, just 32 minutes after the shooting, Mr. Scanlon said:
"I was coming down Locust St. in my auto, having just dropped a friend off at the Academy of Music at Broad and Locust. I had just stopped at the red light where the club Whispers is located. I noticed the Officer approach a black guy standing outside a car, in front of it. The Officer asked him a few questions and then he spread the guy across the car with his arms out, and the guy turned back around and swung at the Officer. The Officer pulled his billy club out and swung hard at the guy, hitting him several times on the arm and the back. The guy was bigger than the Officer. Then I noticed another black guy come running across the street towards the Officer and the guy he was hitting. Then the guy running across the street pulled out a pistol and started shooting at the Officer. He had the gun pointed at the Officer. He fired while he was running at the Officer once, and the Officer fell down. Then he stood over the Officer and he fired three or four more shots point blank at the Officer on the ground. I looked around for another Policeman and didn't see one, so I took off in my car to look for one. I found one on Walnut Street about a block towards Broad. I told them I had just seen an Officer get shot and told them where. I followed them down in my car. I lost them but I just went back down there." (Michael Scanlon Statement 12-9-81, 4:24 AM)
Michael Scanlon was also clearly able to identify the shooter by the clothes he was wearing. In his original statement to police Scanlon stated:
"I saw he [the shooter] had long, wide, sideburns, dark skin, wearing a black knit cap, like over the back of his head, holding the hair in. He had a long-sleeved sweater on. I think it was red and black, or yellow and black." (Scanlon Statement, 12-9-81) Mumia Abu-Jamal was wearing a red and blue-stripped jacket when he was apprehended at the scene.
In his 1982 trial testimony, having first stated that he saw William Cook attack Officer Faulkner by punching him in the face, Mr. Scanlon stated:
"At that point, the Officer reacted, trying to subdue the gentleman, and during that time, another man came running out of the parking lot across the street towards the officer and the gentleman in front of the police car. I saw his hand come up, like this, and I heard a gunshot when the man got to the policeman and the gentleman he had been talking to. Then the officer fell down on the sidewalk and the man walked over and was standing at his feet and shot him twice, I saw two flashes." (6-25-82, TRIAL RECORD PG. 8.6-7)
When asked if he was believed any of the shots fired by the man who ran from the parking lot, hit Officer Faulkner, the following exchanged occurred.
ADA McGill: "Do you
know whether or not any of those shots hit the officer?"
Mr. Scanlon: "Yes, Sir. I could see that one hit the officer
in the face. Because his body jerked. His whole body
jerked." (6-25-82, TRIAL RECORD PG. 8.8)
In his 1982 testimony, Michael Scanlon was also able to physically identify the man who fired the fatal shot.
Jackson: By the way, do you know
whether it was the driver, or the man who ran from the parking
lot who fired the shots?"
Scanlon: "It was the man who ran from the parking lot."
(6-25-82, T.R. 8.34)
In reference to who it was that shot Officer Faulkner, Mr. Scanlon also states:
"He had on a -- I think a red-and-blue stripped coat or sweater." (6-25-82, T.R. 8.40)
Again, Mumia Abu-Jamal was wearing a red-and-blue stripped jacket when he was apprehended at the crime scene.
Eyewitness Cynthia White
Cynthia White was a prostitute who was standing on the corner of 13th and Locust St. that morning, roughly 30 feet away from the shooting. Ms. White gave her original statement to police at 4:15 AM, just 20 minutes after the shooting, and at the same time Robert Chobert was giving his statement, to a different police officer.
In her original statement to police Cynthia White said:
"I saw a Police Officer pull over a Volkswagen. One guy was in the Volkswagen. The Police Officer got out of the car and went over to the Volkswagen. When he got to the Volkswagen, the driver of the Volkswagen got out. They both walked towards the Police car. They got to the front of the car. Another guy came running out of the parking lot on Locust St. He had a hand gun his hand. He fired the gun at the Police Officer about four or five times. The Police Officer fell to the ground. Is started screaming. The guy who shot the Police Officer was sitting on the curb. The guy who got out of the Volkswagen was standing there. A Police wagon came from 12th St. over Locust St. One of the Officers got out of the wagon and went over to the Police Officer. Other Police Officers arrived. I was trying to tell them who shot the Officer, but they wouldn't listen. The Police handcuffed the man who was sitting on the curb, the man who shot the Officer. Then they took the man who got out of the Volkswagen." (Cynthia White Statement 12-9-81)
In her statement, Cynthia White is asked to describe the man who shot Officer Faulkner.
Question: "Can you describe the
man who fired the gun?"
Answer: "He was a black male, short, in his 20's, and he
also wore his hair in dreadlocks."
In her 1982 trial testimony, Cynthia White stated:
"I looked across the street in the parking lot and I noticed he [Jamal] was running out of the parking lot and he was practically on the curb when he shot two times at the Police Officer. It was in the back. The Police Officer turned around and staggered and seemed like he was grabbing for something. Then he fell. Then he [Jamal] came on top of the Police Officer and shot some more times. After that he went over and he slouched down and he sat on the curb." (6-25-82, Trial Record PG. 8.75-7)
Eyewitness Albert Magilton
Albert Magilton was a pedestrian, who was walking across 13th and Locust Street. Mr. Magilton was roughly 100 feet from the shooting, and was standing very close to Michael Scanlon's car. Mr. Magilton stated that he watched the entire scene unfold before him. However, to avoid being struck by a passing car, at the exact moment he heard shots fired, Magilton had to turn his head and look away from the scene for an instant. Despite not seeing the flash of the gun, Mr. Magilton specifically stated, that prior to that moment he saw Jamal, "running from the parking lot towards Officer Faulkner with one arm raised in a shooting fashion."
Within moments of the shooting, Albert Magilton physically identified Mumia Abu-Jamal to police, as "the man he had seen running from the parking lot with his arm raised."
Mr. Magilton's 1982 testimony was as follows:
"I noticed the gentleman [Jamal] coming from the parking lot. He was moving across the street towards where the officer had stopped the Volkswagen. I heard two shots and I didn't see the Officer no more. I proceeded back across the street to see what happened to the Officer. And then as I proceeded back across the street I looked. When I got to the pavement, I had looked down and I had seen the Officer lying there and I didn't see the other gentleman [Jamal] until I -- until I moved closer and he was sitting on the curb." (6-25-82, T.R. 8.75-7)
When asked:
McGill: "Did you later see that
man that you saw running across the street and that you saw at
the curb anywhere else?"
Magilton: "Yes, they [the police] were putting him in the
paddy wagon. An officer had seen me up there and asked me if this
was the man. I said, thatıs the man I seen coming from the
parking lot." (6-2-82, TRIAL RECORD PG. 2.95)
Eyewitness Robert Harkins
Despite giving a written statement to police just one hour after the shooting, Robert Harkins was not called to testify by either side at the 1982 trial. However, he was called to testify as a Defense witness at the 1995 PCRA Appeals Hearing.
Like Robert Chobert, Mr. Harkins was also a cab driver. He drove up to the shooting, at the moment it occurred. Leonard Weinglass, Jamal's current attorney, has stated publicly, "Mr. Harkins was possibly the closest person to the killing."
Mr. Harkins gave a written statement to police at 6:00 AM on December 9, 1981, just 2 hours after the killing. In this statement Robert Harkins said:
"On 12-9-81 between 3:30 AM and 4:00 AM while traveling East on Locust St. from Broad St. I was approaching 13th St. when I observed a police car with its dome lights on. And then I looked over and observed a Police Officer grab a guy, the guy then spun around and the officer went to the ground. He had his hands on the ground and then he rolled over. At this time the male who was standing over the officer pointed a gun at the officer and fired one shot and then he fired a second shot. At this time the officer moved a little and then went flat to the ground. I heard a total of three shots and saw what appeared to me to be three flashes from the gun of the man standing over the Officer. When I saw the Officer go flat to the ground, I drove down the street and at 12th St. and Locust St. I saw a police wagon which was traveling south on 12th St. and I told them that a cop got shot back there and one of the Officers, the passenger, said "a cop?" and I said yea, a cop. At this the wagon turned onto Locust St. and then after that there were a lot of cops that came. It was only a minute from the time the officer got shot until the first cop came." (Robert Harkins Statement 12-9-81)
At the 1995 PCRA Appeals Hearing, the Prosecution objected vigorously to Mr. Harkins being allowed to testify about what he had seen in 1981. The basis for their objection was that the State Supreme Court had only approved Mr. Harkins to be questioned about a photo line up he had allegedly been shown. Overruling the Prosecution's repeated and vehement objections, Judge Albert Sabo permitted the Defense to ask Mr. Harkins their questions, regarding what he had seen that morning.
On 8-25-95, Robert Harkins was asked by Mr. Jamal's attorney, Dan Williams, to describe what he had seen the morning of December 9, 1981.
Robert Harkins: "I seen the guy [the shooter], he shot the
thing, having the gun, the guy [the officer] was lying there.
They were spinning around the pavement."
Dan Williams: "Who was spinning around?"
Robert Harkins: "The cop and the they was
like wrestling a little bit and the cop fell down. He [the
shooter] leaned over and two, two to three flashes from the gun.
But then he walked, and sat down on the curb."
Dan Williams: "The guy who did the shooting walked and
sat down on the curb?"
Robert Harkins: "On the pavement."
(8-2-95, PCRA APPEALS HEARING TRIAL RECORD PG. 208-9)
Catching the defense off guard with his 1995 testimony, like the other four prosecution eyewitnesses in 1982, Robert Harkins stated that the killer shot Officer Faulkner in the face, and then collapsed on the pavement next to Officer Faulkner's dead body. This is the exact spot that police apprehended Mumia Abu-Jamal, with his gun at his side, less than 1 minute after the shooting. The Defense made no attempt to counter the devastating testimony given by Robert Harkins, their own eyewitness. Robert Harkins was the only Defense witness at the 1995 PCRA Appeals Hearing that was deemed by the court to have testified "credibly." Robert Harkins's testimony is virtually identical to the testimony given by the Prosecution's 4 eyewitnesses, in 1982.
There is no doubt that Mr. Jamalıs brother William Cook knows who the killer is.
Several eyewitnesses placed Mr. Cook standing within inches of Officer Faulkner when he was shot. When police arrived Mr. Cook exclaimed, "I ainıt got nothin to do with this." He didnıt say, my brother and I ainıt got nothin to do with this, nor did he say the guy who shot the officer ran away. (6-19-82, TRIAL RECORD PG. 131)
William Cook was not called by the Defense to testify in his brother's behalf in 1982. At the 1995 PCRA hearing, the Defense claimed that Mr. Cook would appear to clear his brother's name. However, William Cook failed to appear at the courtroom. To this day, he has refused to offer any testimony, to counter the damning testimony offered by the other 5 eyewitnesses.
Because of his wound, Jamal was only able to move a few steps away from Officer Faulknerıs body, where he collapsed on the curb. This fact is verified by the testimony of 4 of the five eyewitnesses to Officer Faulkner's murder. The Police Radio Tape Transmittal establishes, that after pulling William Cook's vehicle over and prior to exiting his patrol car, Officer Faulkner requested backup at 3:51:08 AM. The Radio Transmission Log also verifies, that the first police vehicle arrived on the scene at 3:52:27 AM. Just 90 seconds after Officer Faulkner exited his vehicle, to question William Cook.
What this means is, that from the time Jamal shot Officer Faulkner and fell to the ground, it was only a matter of seconds before he was spotted sitting on the pavement next to Officer Faulkner's body, by Officers Shoemaker and Forbes, who were the first officers on the scene. When Shoemaker ordered Jamal to "freeze," testimony verifies, that instead of surrendering Jamal attempted to raise his gun and fire at them. As Mumia Abu-Jamal attempted to reach his gun, Officer Shoemaker, choosing not to use deadly force to subdue him, kicked Jamal in the throat and then kicked the gun away from him. After a violent struggle, the arresting officers handcuffed Jamal and placed him in the back of a police van. (6-19-82, TRIAL RECORD PG. 116)
Eyewitnesses Chobert, White and Magilton were asked to look at Mr. Jamal as he lay inside the wagon. They each physically identified Mumia Abu-Jamal, as the man they had just seen run across the street, and then shoot Officer Faulkner. At trail, these individuals again identified Jamal as the killer and Chobert stating, that he never lost sight of Mr. Jamal from the moment he shot Faulkner until he was placed in the van. (6-19-82, TRIAL RECORD PG. 210-213)
When apprehended, Mumia Abu-Jamal was wearing an empty shoulder holster. A gun owned by Jamal and registered in his name was found at his side. At the 1982 trial, a storeowner testified that he had sold Jamal this gun and he produced a sales receipt with the guns serial number and Jamalıs signature on it to verify this fact.
The gun found on the ground next to Mumia Abu Jamal when he was apprehended was a five shot .38 Caliber Charter Arms Revolver. Jamal's gun contained five (5) spent casings. Four of these casings were from unique Federal Arms .38 Caliber Special +P ammunition, which had a hollow base. This is the exact brand (Federal Arms), type (Special High Velocity Hollow Based +P) and caliber (.38) of bullet removed from Officer Faulknerıs brain. In 1981, Federal Arms was the only manufacturer of +P ammunition with a hollow base.
Additionally, though it could not be matched identically to Jamal's gun to the exclusion of all others, the bullet that killed Officer Faulkner had the same general riffling characteristics (8 lands and grooves and a right hand direction of twist) etched into it's surface, as those found in the barrel of Mumia Abu-Jamal's gun. (6-23-82, TRIAL RECORD PG. 6.167-6.168)
It sounds strange, but George Fassnacht, who was Jamal's ballistics expert in both 1982 and in 1995, has continually refused to test the fatal bullet, and has never offered any evidence in the courtroom to counter these facts.
NOTE: According to
the ballistics specialists we have spoken to and the
Prosecution's expert Anthony Paul, the +P bullet with a hallow
base was rarely seen in 1981. At that time, the only
manufacturer making a +P bullet, with a hollow base,
was Federal Arms. The +P is a high velocity bullet that
carries an extra heavy load of gunpowder.
In addition to ballistics tests that were run on the fatal bullet, tests were also conducted on the bullet that was removed from Mumia Abu-Jamal's body. It was unequivocally determined, that this bullet, was fired from Officer Faulkner's service revolver.
Prior to the 1982 trial, tests to detect the presence of "primer lead and products of combustion" were performed on the jackets worn by both, Mumia Abu-Jamal and Officer Faulkner. The test on each jacket registered positive for primer lead (gunpowder residue). At the trial, prosecution ballistics expert Dr. Charles Tumosa testified that the positive result of the test that was run on Jamal's jacket, meant that the person who shot Mr. Jamal in the chest (Officer Faulkner) had to have been no more than 24 inches away from him when they fired. Dr. Tumosa also testified to the fact, that the person firing the shot that struck Faulkner in the upper-back could not have been more than 24 inches away from Faulkner when they fired. (6-26-82, T.R. 16-17)
Though he had worked closely with them prior to the trial, Mumia Abu-Jamal and his attorney Anthony Jackson never asked the court to allocate funds to allow their ballistics expert, George Fassnacht, to testify in their behalf during the 1982 trial. Additionally, Jamal and Jackson never petitioned the court to grant them the assistance or testimony of a forensic pathologist during the 1982 trial.
In their testimony, several witnesses stated that Mr. Jamal was violently resisting police when he was brought into Thomas Jefferson Hospital. Three people, including two police officers and a hospital security guard, twice heard Jamal shout out, "I shot the Mother Fucker, and I hope the Mother Fucker dies." Two of these individuals, police officers Gary Bell and Gary Wakschul, each reported what they had heard two months after the incident. The third, security guard Priscilla Durham, reported hearing the same outburst to her supervisor the day after the shooting.
In 1982, the jury heard Jamal's attorney argue that the testimony confirming the confession was untrue, because the two police officers came forward so long after the shooting, and because Officer Wakschul had written in a report, that "the Negro male made no comments." However, the Defense had no explanation to counter the testimony of Priscilla Durham. Ms. Durham was a security guard who was employed by the hospital the morning of December 9, 1981. At the 1982 trial, Ms. Durham testified that she had reported what she had heard to her hospital supervisor, in writing, the day after the shooting. She stated that she had heard both of Jamal's incriminating outbursts and that he was "at her feet" when he made them.
Priscilla Durham's 1982 testimony is as follows:
Ms. Durham: "At this time I didn't know [who he was]Šall I did was hear him say, I shot the mother fucker and I hope the mother fucker dies." (6-24-82, T.R. 28)
Ms. Durham was asked where Jamal was when he made his incriminating outburst. She replied:
"He was at my feet." (6-24-82, T.R. 28)
In reference to her report about this incident, Priscilla Durham states the following:
Ms. Durham: "I had already given
a statement."
Mr. Jackson: "To whom?"
Ms. Durham: "Jefferson [Hospital] investigators."
Mr. Jackson: "When did you give that [statement]?"
Ms. Durham: "The next day."
(6-24-82, T.R. 47)
The hospital report referred to by Ms. Durham was produced at trial, verifying her testimony. (6-24-82, TRIAL RECORD, PG. 47)
During the 1982 trial, the jury watched as Mumia Abu-Jamal, with loud outbursts and verbal threats, repeatedly disrupted the trial proceedings on a daily basis. Mr. Jamal had initially agreed to be represented by Anthony Jackson, a formally trained attorney, suddenly he preempted Mr. Jackson's defense by deciding to represent himself. During jury selection, Jamal again changed direction; demanding to have John Africa of MOVE, "represent him." On the first day of trial, Judge Albert Sabo once again allowed Jamal to represent himself. Instead of doing so, Mr. Jamal first refused to speak at all, then he did another about face, and again demanded to have Move's founder, John Africa, "represent him". As he had during jury selection, Judge Albert Sabo refused to allow Mr. Africa, who was a non-lawyer with no standing in the court, to function as Jamal's counsel. In the midst of the 1982 trial, the Supreme Court was asked to review this decision. Judge Sabo's decision was upheld.
Proclaiming that he was "following the directives of John Africa," Mumia Abu-Jamal intentionally and regularly disrupted the court proceedings, or refused to participate in them altogether, by refusing to speak. In a fruitless effort to maintain order, Judge Albert Sabo had Jamal forcibly removed from the courtroom no less than 13 times during the course of the trial. After each removal, Sabo asked Jamal if he would "behave" himself. Each time, he received an affirmative response from Jamal. Judge Sabo would again permit him back into the courtroom, only to have Jamal renew his disruptions, and be removed once again.
Adding to the consternation in the courtroom, Jamal, refused to aid Anthony Jackson in his efforts to mount a defense in his behalf. Once Jamal decided to represent himself, Mr. Jackson had relinquished all statements and legal documents to him. When Jackson was reinstated as "lead counsel," Jackson claims that Jamal failed to return many of these documents to him. As the trial concluded, Mumia Abu-Jamal refused to give Anthony Jackson the names of the individuals he intended to call as his character witnesses, leaving Jackson unprepared to question them. Before the jury, Jamal repeatedly berated Mr. Jackson, once calling the black Anthony Jackson, "a court appointed baboon." In an article written for the Philadelphia Inquirer, in 1982, reporter Marc Coffman wrote of Mumia Abu-Jamal's actions in the courtroom, "his behavior is as bizarre as it is suicidal."
In his 1995 PCRA testimony, Anthony Jackson acknowledged, that by the end of the 1982 trial, his working relationship with Jamal had become extremely strained. The record reflects that by this time, Mumia Abu-Jamal was, for the most part, calling the shots as to how his defense would proceed. Mr. Jackson has stated, that he did his best to hold things together, but Mr. Jamal proceeded as he saw fit, often against Jackson's advice.
In the end, by following the offbeat legal tactics of John Africa, Mumia Abu-Jamal likely sealed his own fate. His intentionally disruptive actions and overtly political statements in the courtroom, which appeared to be intended to paint him the victim, and gain sympathy from the jury, only served to undermine his defense.
NOTE: Mumia
Abu-Jamal and his current attorneys now seek a new trial,
claiming that his 1982 trial was "unfair," and that
Anthony Jackson was "incompetent."
Due to the preponderance of evidence against him, it took the jury just three hours to unanimously convict Mumia Abu-Jamal of Officer Daniel Faulkner's murder.
Immediately preceding his sentencing, and against Anthony Jackson's advice not to do so, Mumia Abu-Jamal freely chose to read a lengthy statement directly to the jury that was about to determine his sentence. In his recklessly worded statement, Jamal challenged the right of the court to try him, refuted the validity of the jury's decision to convict him, and, in what is to date the closest statement he has ever made alleging that he did not shoot Officer Daniel Faulkner, he proclaimed that he was "innocent of the charges for which he had been convicted, no matter what you people [the jury] think." Jamal also took this opportunity to once again overtly proclaim his political and philosophical affiliation with John Africa and the violent MOVE organization.
This is an excerpt from the statement read by Mumia Abu-Jamal to the jury that was about to sentence him:
"This decision today proves neither my guilt nor my innocence. It proves merely that the system is finished. Babylon is falling. Long live MOVE. Long live John Africa." (7-3-82, T.R. 16)
Mumia Abu-Jamal was unanimously convicted of First Degree Murder on July 2, 1982. He was sentenced to death the following day. Several months later, in May 1983, he was formally sentenced in a proceeding before Judge Albert Sabo.
Upon hearing his sentence, Mr. Jamal, the man described as "peaceful" by his 15 character witnesses, appeared to threaten Judge Albert Sabo. Jamal stated:
"Iım going to tell you one thing: You have just sentenced yourself, just like Judge Malmed, just like Malcolm, just like Merna Marshal, and every other Judge who dares to sit up there and act like you got some justice. You are wrong. You have just been sentenced to death. You have just been convicted." (5-25-83, T.R. PG.165)
In 1989, The Pennsylvania State Supreme Court denied Jamalıs direct appeal for release, or a new trial.
In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review Jamalıs direct appeal.
On October 29, 1998, after 3 years of PCRA appeals hearings, the 7 justices of the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court unanimously and resoundingly denied Mr. Jamalıs appeal for release or a new trial. Frequently chastising Jamal and his attorneys for misstating the record, The Supreme Court called many of their arguments, ludicrous and absurd. Additionally, the State Supreme Court upheld the fairness of Mr. Jamal's 1982 trial, specifically supporting the actions taken by Judge Albert Sabo, to maintain order in his courtroom.
In the numerous appeals heard since his conviction in 1982, no less than 13 different appellate court judges have reviewed the extensive claims of innocence, police coercion and court wrongdoing, made by Mumia Abu-Jamal, and his legion of attorneys. To date, there has not been a single judge that has agreed with these allegations.
Mr. Jamal is now beginning the federal appeals process. In late spring 1999, Jamal's attorneys filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will review this petition late in 1999. Theoretically, Jamal has until October 1999 to file his appeal to the Federal District Appeals Court. His Federal appeals are projected to take several years to complete. It is also anticipated that Pennsylvania's current Governor, Tom Ridge, will re instate the Death Warrant that Judge Sabo was required to "stay" in 1995. This is a symbolic act as long as Jamal has pending appeals in Federal Court, but it could serve to hasten the filing of his Federal Appeals.