Mumia NYC: Die Bedeutung der neuesten Entscheidung des Höchsten US-Gerichts

Von: „Steve Bloom“ <……………
Betreff: FW: [MumiaNYC] Legal Update  Mumia Abu-Jamal
Datum: Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2004
 —–Original Message—–
 From: mumianyc [mailto:………………]
 Subject: [MumiaNYC] Legal Update Mumia Abu-Jamal
 ——-~-
  ADDENDUM:  The Significance of the
 Recent Supreme Court Decision
      Since the previous piece was written, Mumia’s legal team has
 filed two petitions for relief in the courts.  There has been a
 ruling on one.
 
      Earlier this year lead counsel Robert R. Bryan, joined by
 Steven W. Hawkins, Professor Judith L. Ritter, and Jill Culbert,
 filed for a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court.  Such a
 writ is a device used by the court to consider issues which it deems
 especially significant.  The team’s petition sought a review of the
 Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s October 8 decision denying any relief
 to Mumia;  in particular:
 
 (1)  Whether it is constitutionally permissible under the 5th, 6th,
 and 14th Amend-ments for a judge to preside over a capital murder
 trial of a Black man in which he is overheard stating during the
 proceedings talking about the defendant:  `Yeah, and I’m going to
 help `em fry the n—‚.  The judge, Albert Sabo, though
 retired since 1990 and now dead, still holds the dubious
 distinction of having
 sentenced more people to death than any other U.S. judge in modern
 times.  Of the 32 people so condemned, all but two were Black,
 Latino or Asian.
 
 (2)  Whether it is constitutionally improper under the 5th, 6th and
 14th Amend-ments for a judge (Ronald Castille) to participate in
 deciding a case on appeal where in his former capacity as District
 Attorney, he had opposed the defendant’s efforts for appellate and
 post-conviction relief, and asked that the death judgement be
 carried out.
 
      On May 17 the Supreme Court declined to review the petition. 
 It made its decision `without prejudice‘, which means that the
 issues can be brought before it again as part of Mumia’s pending
 appeals in the lower federal courts.  But at the same time the Court
 evidently didn’t consider the issues, which graphically expose the
 racism and political corruption in the legal system, to be
 sufficiently important for consideration by themselves.
 
      Overall, the Supreme Court grants only about 2% of petitions
 for certiorari.
 
      Previously, Mr. Bryan and the legal team had filed on December
 8, 2003, a Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief in the Court of Common
 Pleas in Philadelphia based on new evidence of innocence.  Included
 was a sworn declaration by Yvette Williams, in which she revealed
 that a principal prosecution witness, Cynthia White, had admitted
 she was planning to lie at Mumia’s 1982 trial.  Contrary to her
 statement at trial, White did not witness the shooting, but was
 bribed and coerced by the police to give perjured testimony against
 Mumia.  She also lied with the help of the prosecutor, Joseph
 McGill, when she stated that no one was at the crime scene except
 Mumia, his brother and the cop.  This petition is still pending.
 
 May 2004
 
 
 –Mumia is Innocent!  Stop the Frame Up!  Free Mumia!–
 
 Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition, NYC, P.O. Box 650, NY, NY
 10009 212-330-8029, www.FreeMumia.com, info@FreeMumia.com
 
 YC, P.O. Box 650, NY, NY 10009
 212-330-8029, www.FreeMumia.com, info@FreeMumia.com