Opinions can be disagreed with. What you claimed was false as to fact.
By facts? Again, that is obvious.
Uncorroborated by the other judge allegedly present.
And these claims have been found to be without merit.
I find it vaguely unsettling that someone can read about a subject and wind up with a position even more ignorant than they had when they began.
Some people claim to have been abducted and anally probed by aliens. Very few people believe these claims. Do you?
Regards,
Shodan
He was tough, certainly. That is not automatically a fault. Remember these were jury decided cases.
Cite?
Completely irrelevant. He is not his own lawyer and could not control his actions.
I’ve read plenty, and what I see from the Free Mumia side is a lot of rhetoric, and a lot of mythmaking, and a lot of avoiding the evidence.
I’ve read the trial transcripts, have you? Note that you will not find the transcripts on any Free Mumia website, just snippets at best.
I’ve read the appeals transcripts, have you? If so then maybe you could explain why PA Supreme court declared nothing wrong with Sabo’s conduct in the Mumia trail and voted 12-0 against Mumia’s appeal. This a Supreme court we are talking about. These guys have a hard time agreeing on anything, yet they found the claims of Mumia’s lawyers to be utterly baseless.
If you look at any popular case you are also going to find folks who confess to it, just for the attention they get. In the 90’s, Mumia’s lawyers beamed proudly about how their client rejected the Arnold Beverly since they considered it so ridiculous. Fast forward to a few years ago, Mumia fired those lawyers and signed his name to the Beverly confession. Desperate measures, I guess.
But the facts are these: According to all the witnesses in the area that could see what happened, there were only three people in the area where Faulkner was killed: Faulkner, Mumia, and Mumia’s brother.
Nobody else.
Faulkner was killed, execution-style, with a handgun at close range. That means either Mumia did it or his brother did it. There was no one else there, unless the invisible man is part of your defense. Mumia was shot by Faulkner, that much is certain. And while the bullets that hit Faulkner were deformed, they matched the ammo type and the spent shells in Mumia’s gun.
Mumia’s gun and Faulkner’s gun were the only ones in that area. There is no evidence whatsoever of any other firearm and no evidence that Mumia’s brother owned a gun.
The witnesses state they saw Mumia run across Locust street and shoot Faulkner in the back. Faulkner then turned and fired his own gun, hitting Mumia. Faulkner then collapsed. Mumia, then stood over Faulkner and emptied his gun into Faulkner’s face. Mumia then walked a bit and collapsed. That is what the witnesses saw. Details vary, but that is to be expected. When the police arrived on the scene, according to them Mumia tried to reach for his gun, but was prevented from doing so via a kick to the stomach. Police also state that Mumia’s brother said he “had nothing to do with this”.
Most, if not all witnesses identified Mumia at the scene.
The only witnesses who in any way support Mumia did not have a view of the scene, and the best they have is ‘saw someone else running far from the scene’.
To date, neither Mumia nor his brother have told any tale of what happened that night. Mumia’s brother has avoided testifying on behalf of his brother despite possibly having the best view of all. The closest Mumia or his brother have come to telling a story was to sign their names to the ridiculous Arnold Beverly ‘confession’.
The witnesses, the physical evidence, everything points to Mumia as the killer. At this point it is as certain as a trial can get. Without any scrap of worthwhile evidence pointing to him not being the killer. Mumia’s lawyers put out a lot of tales and myths for the media, but when it came to the Supreme Court their evidence was shown for what it was: shoddy myth making. 12-0 was the vote against Mumia’s appeal.
But hey! If you can’t attack the evidence, attack the judge.
The supreme court certainly did find Sabo’s conduct wrong. But they said that he did not do anything procedurally wrong. Even that has been disputed.
Yes I believe it happened to you.
I had no knowledge of this story. I find contradictions. The fact that you don’t is not about a flawed argument. It is your closed mind. I still maintain you believe you are correct. You do not know you are.
Where are you getting this stuff?!
By who?
Why should we keep an open mind to stories you cannot support and only give fractions of details?
http://www.freemumia.org/articles/Mackler-2-25-03.html Actually I provide the opposing stories. I just get short answers back. Here is another article indicating he did not get a fair trial That is why we don’t do the death penalty. The 3rd I posted. Mr. M
Sorry, I see what you mean. You were the “Bingo.” My other comment about waiting for evidence was directed at Peter. Again, sorry for the confusion.
http://www.ejusa.org/archives/mumia/sabo2b.html Heres is another argument about Sabo and the lack of a fair trial. Maybe some of you can feel absolutely comfortable killing Mumia but I am not. When I saw how avidly some posters were about putting this guys lights out, I decided to see if it were a clear case. Sorry . it is not.
An conpiracy-laden opinion piece from a Mumia sympathizer is hardly comparable to the combined weight of legal experience at Mumia’s trial, or more importantly, his lengthy appeals process.
Jeez, look at this myth-mucking:
To support this? His (and the book he is critical of):
Funny how they claim to have been there, since they were there. Just because witnesses didn’t notice everyone on the street at the time (as if something caught their attention). The police had Chobert at the scene and had him identify Mumia on the spot.
This is laughable, conspiracy theory crap.
Those witnesses not being on the scene themselves. Like Veronica Jones whose story has changed as she was paid.
This article is so full of nonsense. I wish I had time to go over it.
http://www.labournet.net/mumia/0109/terrimc.html This is about he statement the judge made.
Again, uncorroborated.
You will accept nothing. That is clear. Affidavits don’t count either. What do you need the court reporter to drop by your home.
There is doubt about an unfair trial, a biased judge and a poor defense. That is doubt. He should get a fair trial If you are so sure ,he will lose ,then you should be clamoring for one.
gonzomax: Evidently, it is you who is not accepting the simple fact that the guilt phase of the trial has been determined to be fair.
I accept evidence, when it is supported. You have not provided such. You posted an article that is a conspiracy-laden, and makes claims about what the defense proved that goes contrary to what multiple courts have determined. Its no surprise I don’t accept it, its laughable junk.
Affidavits are just statements. Without any further evidence it is just one person’s claim. I don’t work that way. I’d like to think most people don’t.
Not for me. Not with what you have produced.
Unproven.
As has been shown to you, the poor defense was because of Mumia himself. He is to blame, not his otherwise very competent assistant council.
I don’t clamor for things to be redone. Mumia had his day in court. He had as many resources as a man in his position could ask for. But in addition to having the weight of evidence against him, he messed up his own defense and tried to make constant disruptions in the courtroom. He screwed it up. Not Judge Sabo. Not Anthony Jackson.
As for another trial. He’s had over 25 years of the appeal process, which is actually very good at weeding out real problems with trial procedure and. Unfortunately for Mumia they do not grant retrials on invented problems, which is all the Mumia movement really has.
Why should I clamor for a new trial for Mumia? I could probably find lots of other people who are in prison who truly deserve another trial, but as Rodney Anonymous said in Screw Mumia "Unfortunately, for them, they don’t have dreadlocks, a funny name, or - most importantly - a fan club. " Why should effort and court time be wasted on this painfully guilty, remorseless murderer?
Gonzo - the man shot a policeman in front of witnesses and he never left the scene of the crime because the officer returned fire and wounded him. There is zero doubt that he murdered the officer. His own brother wouldn’t testify on his behalf and he was at the scene of the crime.Mumia made a complete mockery of the trial. Not his lawyer, not the Judge not the Jury… him. Unless you want to plead that he is insane and should not have been allowed to intervene on his own behalf at the trial then you have no argument.
By the court system that protects itself.
I see potential bias in the judge and the trial. I do not say it happened but it may well have.
It is not me. I never heard of him until today. I find lots of sites that absolutely say he was railroaded. I do not know. I do not say that anything here is sufficient to make me feel it was an up and up trial. I do not know. How can anyone who just reads or hears about a trial KNOW anything. I understand some believe he did it. ok
You are, and have been, saying that very thing. And this last post proves that you’re buying into the conspiracy theorists ridiculous assertions. The facts of this case are quite plain.
Daniel Faulkner was killed by bullets from a gun registered to Mumia. Which was found at the murder scene. Next to Mumia. A bullet from Faulkner’s gun was in Mumia’s body. Eyewitnesses at the scene described what occurred. As the physical evidence mentioned above suggests, surprise, surprise, they saw Mumia fire on Faulkner, the wounded officer return fire, then Mumia finish off the job he started before he collapsed from the gun wound from Faulkner. From this cite:
God almighty, this isn’t even remotely a border-line case proving guilt. Decades of follow-up and defense effort have not been able to overcome these pesky little facts. Sorry.