I think if you go back to my OP, the courts aren’t even questioning his guilt anymore, but simply the procedure that was used during the penalty phase of his trial which he was sentenced to die.
My chief complaint was that it has taken 27 years to reach a ruling on a procedural issue. It’s not like there is new evidence, or a piece of DNA that somebody wants tested. That, while still a hell of a long time, is more understandable.
As far as procedural issues, in 27 years, every judge in the country could have memorized the trial proceedings and long ago ruled on every facet of this case.
But since this thread is now a debate on guilt/innocence, no offense to anyone, but there couldn’t be a man more guilty than Mumia Abu-Jamal, and the claims of his innocence would be laughable had they not gained so much traction. This is OJ evidence X 10
People win appeals all the time. The idea that the court system “protects itself” by refusing to ever admit that lower courts got it wrong is beyond laughable.
I have no problem with “the court system protecting itself.” Part of that protection is to ensure the impartiality of the system. Faulkner is the victim here, not his killer. And his killer got an impartial jury that determined the facts of the case.
The courts do not generally look at issues in a case until asked to do so under appeal. Given that the defense has essentially used the shotgun defense (toss out every possible excuse, defense, or alternative theory) hoping something would stick, it’s entirely likely they never considered there was something actually wrong with the sentence. Plus, jurisprudence may simply have changed slightly over 30 years.
Intriguingly, the appeals court did not restate the sentence; they simply tsaid the original procedure was flawed and ordered the penatly phase be redone. So Mr. Jamal might get… the death penalty! Althought at this point I doubt he’d ever get executed.
How often does DNA exonerate a person in jail and the prosecutor says “we got it right and I would do it again”. Prosecutors are trying to get a great guilty rate. They do not appear to be trying to get at the truth. Was the Duke rape case so long ago.
I do not know about the Mumia case. There is evidence of a biased judge, and a poor defense. That does not go to guilty and innocent. It does to whether he got a fair trial. I do not know. A new trial would not hurt any one.
No there isn’t. You’ve had this explained to you multiple times now.
Multiple judges and rulings over the years have determined that Mumia got a fair trial. Please stop repeating the above statement as it has already been shown to be wrong in every way.
Yes it would. Read the accounts of Maureen Faulkner in ‘Murdered by Mumia’ and tell me that wasn’t pain. You want her to go through that again?!
Furthermore, our judicial system is not in the habit of giving people new trials just because they have a fan club and some people whining ‘it won’t hurt anyone’. You have to have genuine proof of misconduct. Neither you nor Mumia’s lawyers have been able to show any of that.
Just because they have a fan club. That is it, That is dishonest. There are a lot of reasoned people who think it was a bad trial. That is totally unfair.
Just because they have a fan club. That is it, That is dishonest. There are a lot of reasoned people who think it was a bad trial. That is totally unfair.
No, it’s completely fair. All the facts have been dissected ad nauseum, and the only reasonable conclusion is that Mumia murdered Faulkner. That a whole bunch of people are prepared to ignore the facts and argue for his innocence anyway is not meaningful.
This has been going on for twenty-four fucking years. Simply because those who support Mumia are persistent does not mean that there is any reason to believe he is innocent. For that, you need facts, and your side seems to be rather short on those.
So why don’t you come up with one of your famous “cites” to show the reason why all those people support him. A real, documented reason - not one that has been exploded half a dozen times over.
No. It is not. The call for a new trial is not based on any real facts about the original trial. It is based on emotion and unsupported claims. You’ve repeatedly had this pointed out to you.
Even you must come down to “Who would a new trial hurt”. Right there you are asking for special exemptions to process for Mumia for no reason. That is fanhood at its worst.
Argumentum ad populum without decent legal arguements or evidence that holds up is the very definition of fan-dom. These ‘reasoned people’ could easily be putting their energy into a case where the defendant is/was unfairly railroaded or the victim of an abberation of our justice system. But instead they pick Mumia, who is a patently guilty, back-stabbing, cop-executing scumbag. To justify this. they dig a deeper and deeper pit of nonsense for themselves.
I am not a fan of Mumia. I now have heard of him for 2 days. I see lots of sites and arguments that make me think he was poorly treated by the court system. People that claim everybody who disagrees with their stance is 100 percent wrong and have a lesser motive are being dishonest. I do not like shodanizing arguments. There is a middle ground inhabited by thinking people who disagree.
Websites are rarely much more than propaganda pieces for causes unless they back up their claims with evidence. So far, what you shown us (a crank’s article and the unsupported testimony of one person) does not even come close to being evidence
Because that’s usually the case with Mumia. I’ve heard nothing but lies and distortions.
The reason you’re getting piled on is because this subject has been well researched by other dopers.
Officer Faulkner’s widow has tirelessly waged a war against the misinformation that has sprung from this man. If you study the actual trial transcripts you will understand that there is no question that he shot Faulkner and then finished him off. You will also understand that he made a complete joke out of his own trial. Try this site for a serious explanation of what occurred and the trial that followed.
I’m not the biggest proponent of the death penalty because I want a very high level of proof. There is no doubt as to whether or not Mumia killed Officer Faulkner. His only defense would be insanity and I would certainly entertain the idea. But it wouldn’t change the level of certainty, based on facts, that he killed Faulkner.
I understand there are a zillion conspiracy sites regarding this subject but the evidence is so overwhelming as to negate debate. It’s difficult not to pile on people when they have not reviewed the basics of the trial. Mumia has been flim-flaming support for his release for 26 years and has received wide support simply because people don’t research the trial. Put his picture on a T-shirt and he’s an instant celebrity. We actually had a local college invite him to be their commencement speaker (even after the evidence was pointed out regarding his guilt). And the dwindling supply of students couldn’t understand why the $36,000 a year college went under.
Crappy example. The truth is in the middle because a lot of involved people see the flaws in the treatment. His lawyers are uninformed/ Everbody who sees a problem is less informed that the people in this thread? Lawyers,witnesses people involved all less qualified. i am not buying it.
The flaw is in peopple who think they know something for sure that they can not, they should say I am convinced. I believe. But they know zip.
“research” meaning “has read a website written by people who want Mumia dead.”
Basically, he complained from the start that his court appointed lawyer had repeatedly refused to follow instructions, that the defence being given was not the defence he wanted, and so on. He repeatedly said this man is not my lawyer, don’t listen to him listen to me, and so on. And he was repeatedly silenced.
The anti-Mumia lobby present this as Mumia wrecking his own case. To me it looks like his lawyer wrecked the case, and Mumia got understandably angry.
It is a highly biased site with a particular agenda that distorts everything in favour of that agenda.
Let me spell this out clearly. The freemumia website is full of lies. The danielfaulkner website is full of lies. Neither one is to be trusted.
Having looked at both sides and tried to pick my way through the lies told by both I believe the following:
Mumia killed Faulkner
He did so because Faulkner was attempting to beat up his brother
he is guilty of criminal homicide
but not capital murder
25 years in prison is sufficient punishment for his crime.
Or maybe he could plead mitigating circumstances, and get the charges reduced to a lesser degree of homicide.
Multiple judicial rulings have determined that there are not signifigant flaws.
What his lawyers know or don’t know is irrelevant. Their arguments have fallen flat in the courts, and that is due completely to the weakness of their case. That means their arguments that the trial was unfair, and by extension your arguments that the trial was unfair, are baseless. how many times do we have to tell you this?
Except he didn’t plead this. He said he didn’t do it. His brother wouldn’t testify against him so your logic regarding Faulkner beating him up needs to be explained.
Mumia shot Faulkner, then after being shot himself, walked over to Faulkner and finished off the job. In Pennsylvania, as a matter of law, “the design to kill can be formulated in a fraction of a second”–i.e., premeditation; it needn’t be a plot worked on for weeks. If Mumia killed Faulkner (we agree on that) in the manner described by the eyewitnesses (who saw Faulkner use force after Cook threw a punch, BTW), it was premeditated and deliberate. That is first-degree murder. Sorry.