The case of Mumia affects all who come before the U.S. "Justice" system. 
 
This overview of the current status of the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal will be very useful in countering misinformation in mainstream media...and in discussing the matter. 
STAND WITH MUMIA! ALL OUT AUG. 17-18! 

By Laura Herrera, Jeff Mackler, Cristina Vasquez Gutierrez 

On July 19,in Philadelphia, Pa., Federal District Court Judge William H. Yohn Jr. denied a motion by Mumia Abu-Jamal's legal defense team to order the state of Pennsylvania to take a deposition from Arnold Beverly, who has confessed that he, not Jamal, killed police officer Daniel Faulkner on Dec. 9, 1981. 

Mumia has been on Pennsylvania's death row for close to 20 years and confined 23 hours daily in a tiny cell at State Correctional Institute Greene in Waynesburg, Pa. 
The award-winning African American journalist was convicted of murder in a 1982 racist frame-up trial. His conviction, overseen by the notorious "hanging" state court Judge Albert Sabo, has been condemned worldwide by groups ranging from the European Parliament and the Japanese Diet to Amnesty international and the 1.8-million member California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO. 

Yohn's ruling cited the reactionary 1993 U.S. Supreme Court Herrera decision, 
in which then Chief Justice Renquist ruled: "In criminal cases the [state] trial is the paramount event for determining the defendant's guilt or innocence. Federal courts do not sit to correct errors of fact, but to insure that individuals are not imprisoned in violation of the Constitution." 
Paraphrasing Renquist, Yohn's 12-page ruling held: "Even though [Jamal] references a potential claim for actual innocence, such a claim, absent an independent constitutional violation, may not be the subject of a federal habeas [appeal] petition." 
But Yohn's decision was not limited to a simple rejection of taking a written 
statement from Beverly, the confessed killer. His aim was to virtually advise the Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia that Mumia's case should not be heard. 
Mumia is currently seeking a new state Post Conviction Relief Act hearing to present critical new evidence proving his innocence. At presiding Judge Dembe's order, Mumia 
will be present in the Court of Common Pleas on Friday, Aug. 17, while his attorney's argue that this evidence should be heard.Yohn's ruling effectively advises Dembe, however, that Mumia's 1982 frame-up conviction should not be considered-in part the grounds that state time limits regarding the introduction of new evidence have been 
exceeded. This disregards the fact that a challenge to these very limits is a central 
component of the 275-page brief that Mumia and his new Legal team has submitted to the state court. 
Thus, a confrontation is expected at the very opening of the Aug. 17 proceedings. The prosecution may cite Yohn to argue that Dembe must reject the request of Mumia's new out-of-state attorneys to litigate Mumia's case in the state of Pennsylvania, on grounds that the request for a new hearing itself is barred by statute. 

Thus Mumia's tormentors, alarmed at the prospect of a public airing of a case 
whose dimensions include the exposure of a police frame-up involving the state's prosecution team itself, may seek to end the proceedings before they start. 
The defense team will in turn seek to substantiate in detail its rightful standing in court. To do this the defense is legally obligated to both present new evidence proving Mumia's innocence and to prove "ineffective assistance of counsel" and/or "constructive denial of counsel" in regard to the conduct of Mumia's previous attorneys. Mumia's brief contains voluminous material in both areas. 

The spectacle of Mumia fighting for his very life while state and federal authorities seek to prevent the real killer from testifying is a grim prospect, which to be avoided requires a renewed and massive mobilization on Mumia's behalf. 

Yohn's outrageous decision also cites chapter and verse from the Clinton-signed 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), wherein federal judges are required to grant a "presumption of correctness" in state court decisions. This extends even to "findings of fact" like Sabo's-in which critical evidence and eyewitness accounts proving Mumia's innocence were stricken from the court record while false testimony from police-intimidated witnesses was allowed to stand. Yohn's ruling concludes: "Even if Beverly's statements [that he killed Faulkner] were found to be credible, this does not prove that the [state] government possessed and suppressed information that it struck deals with [Cynthia] White and [Robert] Chobert." 

New brief submitted by attorneys 

At the time of the Yohn ruling, the judge was in full possession of a copy of the new 275-page brief submitted to the state court by Mumia and his new attorneys-Marlene Kamish, Elliot Grossman, and Nicholas Brown. Contrary to Yohn's conclusion, this brief details the fundamental corruption of the testimony of the two key prosecution witnesses, White and Chobert. It demonstrates that their testimony was changed to coincide with the state's fabricated version of the murder and that it was the product of 
direct police collusion and intimidation. 

Yohn rejects consideration of the very facts and circumstances-that is, fundamental corruption and suppression of evidence-that the minute exceptions in the AEDPA provide for to obtain a full evidentiary hearing. In the face of Beverly's confession and voluminous evidence corroborating its authenticity Yohn writes: "When all the circumstances surrounding petitioner's Beverly claim are considered, I cannot conclude that petitioner has alleged information sufficient to establish that had the statements 
contained in the Beverly declaration been presented at trial, no reasonable juror would have found petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." The new brief presents for the first time a detailed account of virtually every moment of the murder of police officer Faulkner. It states that his conduct jeopardized illegal police activities in the area, including involvement in prostitution and drug operations that were then under the investigation of the FBI arid the U.S. Justice Department.Indeed, a police officer present and directly involved with the on-scene murder investigation, Alphonso Giordano-who falsely swore that Mumia confessed to Faulkner's murder while on the way to the hospital-was indicted and convicted of such illegal activities. Giordano's conviction later led the prosecution to decline to call him as a witness at Mumia's trial. (The scope of Philadelphia police corruption, revealed through indictments and convictions stemming from the intimidation of witnesses and the planting of evidence at that time, was so extensive that scores of Philadelphia frame-up victims were ordered released from prison.) Beverly's confession and account are corroborated by statements from Mumia's brother (eyewitness Billy Cook) as well as from FBI informant Donald Hersing and Mumia's own statement accounting for his actions, coupled with a mountain of evidence in the new brief collected from court, police, and investigative material from both the defense and prosecution. Contrary to Yohn's conclusion, this material proves far "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Mumia could not have been the killer. 

The 275-page brief documents the incredible history Mumia's frame-up, and for the first time presents a precise scenario of the murder of Daniel Faulkner by the criminal mob and the police-assisted murder team of Arnold Beverly and Kenneth Freeman. 
It demonstrates that Mumia was not on the scene at the time of Faulkner's murder, that Mumia did not have a gun, and that when Mumia did arrive on the scene after Faulkner's murder, he was shot down by a member of the Philadelphia police department who was also complicit in Faulkner's murder. 
Ignoring the new evidence, Yohn all but states that should it come back to him for federal review, he would reject Mumia's claim of innocence and Mumia's associated demand for a full evidentiary hearing. 

Build a mass movement! 

Mumia's legal prospects are caught in the grip of a legal system that has been honed by race and class prejudice to make state court convictions "effective," that is, immune from federal review so as to result in expedited execution. The truth of his assertions will not in and of themselves prove decisive to the win-fling of his freedom. 

Mumia, his legal team,and his political supporters have long understood that his life rests in our capacity to build a mass movement that cannot be denied justice. We must fight to make the price of Mumia's legal lynching too high to pay in regard to a fundamental loss of confidence in the so-called criminal justice system. 

Great strides have already been made in this endeavor, but we are still some 
distance from insuring Mumia's freedom, a victory that will open the door wide to renewed social and human rights mobilizations on all fronts. 
The broadening and intensification of Mumia's national and international defense 
efforts has never been more urgent.There are a host of legal irons still in the fire-from the immediate fight for the new Post Conviction Relief Act state hearing, which opens on Aug. 17, to the 29-point habeas corpus appeal brief still pending before Judge Yohn. 
The latter also raises numerous constitutional violations arising from Mumia's trial, including the racist exclusion of Black jurors and the denial of his right to self-representation and to the counsel of his choice. 

In regard to the last point. Yohn recently rejected consideration of a defense motion to amend the 29-point habeas brief with a clause challenging Judge Sabo's refusal to allow Mumia's choice of co-counsel, John Africa, to assist him during his 1982 trial. 
There are no lack of issues on which any judge, including Yohn, could rule that Mumia must be immediately released and/or granted a new trial. Indeed, such a ruling will be the product of a mass movement whose power and truth cannot be denied. Mass demonstrations in solidarity with Mumia have been called across the country on Friday and Saturday, Aug. 17 and 18. 

In Philadelphia, the International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal has called on supporters to "Stand With Mumia" on Aug. 17, 9 a.m., at the courthouse (13th and Filbert Streets) where Mumia will be present. Anticipating the protests, police announced that Mumia will be accompanied to the courthouse by a SWAT team in addition to state police and sheriff's units. 

The following day, a mass protest is scheduled for Philadelphia, beginning 9 a.m. at the East side of City Hall, followed by a march to the Federal Building on Independence Mall. In San Francisco, the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal has called for a 12 noon solidarity mass picket line and press conference on Aug. 17 at the Calif. State Building at Van Ness and McAllister. On Aug. 18, the Mobilization has set 12 noon for a mass regional rally at Powell and Market Streets. 
For further information contact: East Coast, (215) 476-8812. 
West Coast, (415) 695-7745. 

Laura Herrera, Jeff Mackler, and Cristina Vasquez Gutierrez are co-coordinators of the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal in Northern California.