thumbnail of In Black America; National Association of Black Journalists, Mumia-Abu-Jamal Case, Part 3
Transcript
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
fb with this because this is america when you talk about this is changing their story got a little deeper look into motivation to promises made benefits conferred for that evidence so cabdriver trowbridge in this story but he told the police that night the first thing he said arriving officers your channel first thing
that i ran away with a guy and he ran away union was laying on the sidewalk another witness who so aw someone away with a prostitute named robert jones she also told the police that she saw someone runaway well when she took this then she denied ever police that even though it's in an official intervening or why did you change your story that why us the defense attorney from mumia abu jamal less obvious the national association of black journalists at its twentieth annual national conference in philadelphia found on december twelve nineteen seventy five in a b day of the largest minority journalists organization in the world you on innovations was created to unify after american jailers bring recognition to their achievement in the newsrooms of america and to bring about a better understanding
between black and white media when the more than twenty five hundred working journalists media professionals and students arrive at the host of jail they were met with demonstrators the protests in iraq everyday involvement or lack thereof from mumia abu jamal case ms abu jamal former president of the philadelphia association of black journalists has messages to death for the nineteen eighty one killing a philadelphia police officer i'm danielle hansen june it they're welcome to another edition of a black america this week the national association of black journalists and the mayor abu jamal case part three in black america well he said i was by officers in the sixth district they held me for four to five hours i really done nothing wrong they interrogated me they harass me amen they've offered to let me work my street corner without arrest if i would eat using fingered mr
jamal that's how evidence is generating now that cited spoke testimony that's worthy of believe a third person that record as he looked out over a hotel window and saw someone ran was never produced a trial why because romney is attorney never attempted to contact her before the trial but he did attend to contact her during the trial and in a remarkable episode use the judge's chambers while the tree sap waiting the telephone or any asked her she would come to port and tell the story of the shooter running away and what he said she said to him i don't like black people i was sexually assaulted by black know once and i don't want to help you
according to accounts of the december ninth nineteen eighty one as a philadelphia police officer daniel faulkner stopped a green volkswagen a locust tree just east of thirteen straight located in a red light district of nightclubs and bars mr abu jamal was working as a cab driver when he came upon the officer beating his brother william cook when you went to assist his brother officer faulkner's shadow in his chess responding officers found a dying faulkner and just abu jamal sitting nearby on occur and in a pool of blood some recourse state that three witnesses identified abu jamal as a killer others say four witnesses saw third man she loves of faulkner then run away on june fourth nineteen ninety five pennsylvania governor tom ridge sign a death warrant for abu to mock execution when abu jamal now sits on death row after winning a stay of the regional execution date august seventeenth nineteen seventy five he also seeks a new
trial at the time of this production at the twentieth annual national conference of the national association of black donors the controversy surrounding this case was so it is the protestors demonstrated outside the holes whole tale and in some inside the old tales the subject with the topic of a heated conversation at the end of business meeting in this week's programme we conclude the palace question on the case i'm a mere abu jamal was been since the death for the nineteen eighty one killing of officer daniel faulkner so she never appeared to testify only one person did jesse hightower and he said he saw the shooter run away after he heard shots but he was alone and so he was rallying this will be so you must be looking what happened here in terms of the evidence money was not able to put his weaknesses on the police were able to manipulate witnesses and changing their story and indeed
they did and so none of this was adequately presented at the trial oh and the four witnesses mr miguel points out yes he says one was a prostitute with thirty eight arrests three pending charges when she testified already in prison up in massachusetts first time she told the police i think the gun was in the writing and the second five three days later he said no the left in the third leg he testified he decided to give it up and said i don't know what he and his other three witnesses never saw a prostitute on the street for research one of them is a job or a cab driver knew were unable to scare but they didn't steer another witness said he was down half a block from the establishment nowhere near the issue so this is the kind of evidence three of those four have criminal records won the cab driver had one
criminal record he throw molotov cocktail into a public school here in philadelphia for pay he was convicted of arson after mr miguel argued judge say vote decided that the jury should hear that because it didn't go to reflect on his ability to tell the truth even though he was then on probation so we cited nineteen separate episodes that occurred during this trial and on the appeal that wharton trial when rooney abu jamal went to trial it's june and july nineteen eighty two he acknowledged that's the gator and that was stated on the record he had no pathologist in the lead in one because the star witness for the prosecution the prostitute testified about the position mr jamal was in when he was shot which a pathologist now the assistant our interview at citi says it was medically impossible he could have been in that position she was flat pour some over your position as she fabricated
witness but he had no apologies he had no firearms expert and we put on a firearms expert this time to testify about these weapons and let me say this about the gun the important fact is that the congress at the bullet with a forty four caliber bullet and he put it in an official report and you cannot fire forty four caliber bullet with a thirty eight caliber gun is the corner right or was there police laboratory right where there's conflict between the two but the fact of the matter is the jury was never told of a conflict mr miguel called the corner of the stamp than ever asked them back what an movie is a journey didn't know not because he hadn't read the medical examiner's report rates so the jury never heard of that conflict if they had they might have found reasonable doubt right then and there but more importantly the gun was recovered <unk> jamal's dunne yes it was his gun license
to you know rob white says the character he had a gun for some protections legal weapon and was thirty but it was never matched to any of the bullets that were found at the scene there never match and the police lab expert who testified said i could not match any of these bullets including the bullets recovered from the officer's body chemistry jamal's gone because apple it was so degraded that it was impossible to make a match but let me say this to you they cite the fact that five cartridges were empty or have been fired in this huge milestone but they don't know that at most there were only three bullets that were fired by the assailant because only three bullets recovered at the scene and the whole time so i just want to finish with this one on the convention
that alone requires a new trial the prosecution brought on to witnesses who's sixty four days after the event said they remembered suddenly that mr jamal had confessed in the hospital for sixty four days at all no and they remembered it after he filed a complaint against the police but the officer who was with mr jamal that night who arrested him and having a city officer wait till that filed an official report that night saying the male negro may go on injury every year that the answer is no jury never heard it because of the strike which always go on vacation and unavailable we now know because mr wessel testify ten days ago for the first time although he was pulled on vacation he was right here in the city of philadelphia and within fifteen minutes of the courthouse but the prosecutor
refused to try to bring him in so key evidence which would or rebut it the so called confession was never put into a truck the evidence on the gun was never adequately put into trial the evidence on the confession was never put in the trial the eyewitnesses were given benefits some eyewitness testimony was suppressed water was never produced this is not a trial that needs any standard of due process monday abu jamal is entitled to a new trial so that the question of innocence or guilt may write me be judged by a jury that's fairly selective not one in which the prosecution removes eleven of fifteen african americans who were qualified to sit on the jury and let's
go back and forth and gavin will also take that questions from the audience have an interview with a result by the way out of all of a lot of their lives can i go and record this is this is going to be fairly free ranging as relates to be a lot of the panel members and is going to allow them to go back and forth or any of you would like to raise the question but the other obvious feel free to do so and if not with a question from the audience let's go right to the audience when i think one thing out of those moderate to question that led to mr mcgill mr wine glass first to learn
to mr mcgill what was leaked the information about romney is black panther party membership and raised during the sentencing phase there've been allegations that was that but that was an indication that it was a a political trial and that it had no relevance to what he may or may not have done in december of nineteen eighty one mr chema during the course of the sentencing phase during the sentencing phase mr jamal read a forty five page document which basically was an indictment of the system accusations that the police were out there to kill him and they couldn't do it out in the street they would do it or are that the police had brought to kill move members that he is
attorney was intense but in a conspiracy with the judge and me to convict him he just went on and on about the fact that it is said that the police themselves were out to kill him and his fellow supporters now also there were about twenty five perhaps less character witnesses that testified at trial during with all of this being sedated by the defense on cross examination i did not focus on his association but he did in his responses to my questions what i was attempting to do this focus on the statement that he had written which was a quote from the us eight own political power grows out of the barrel of a gun and given this and the fact that he had stated that i asked him about that an inconvenient facts still adopted also
about more power to the people to revive his statements both that sentencing as well as his character testament had he not going into what he had with his four page statement i would not have been used it then insisted in fact he's stop me from asking questions he says no mother mrs question let me read the whole article and first i said we are like they ask questions but he was really running the show in many respects mr jamal that was at least he believed he was and he then stayed and i say don't let him read the article so he read the whole article which basically was a summary by his article posted us a summary of the black panther problems at that time their decisions to defend themselves against the police their decisions to work the provision in the use of
firearms he brought all of that this is about films questioning the prosecutor's last question one of them a response to that point really talking about a different issue assuming everything goes to washington says is accurate the issue is not that the issue is whether be a black panther association in as much and how it was introduced before the jury and whether or not that is not consistent with the lot that time that one wears yellow y fail to see
about raising the question of whether or not when mr jamal was sixteen years old twelve years before this episode he had quoted chairman mao zedong which incidentally ronald reagan frequently good as well that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun what that has to do what is the relevance of that to the issue of whether or not twelve years later he had witnessed a police officer beating his brother which the prosecution witnesses testified do with a flashlight causing a deep gash in the side of his head a flashlight was found on the sidewalk what that has to do with that particular episode unless what you're trying to say to a jury which is made up mostly of elderly white
jurors that this man is a militant and therefore because he's a militant you should get the death penalty one thing that you haven't been told this case was understand there was not an effective more in that room there were no expert witnesses pleaded witnesses were never called you know what the jury did when they were not that deliberate they came back and they asked the judge to be reconstructed on manslaughter this vicious crime that you've learned that jurors in and defend a case which you are told is so compelling they came back they wanted to know instructions on manslaughter that's how weak the case once but in the penalty phase the prosecution realizing the other weekdays then purposely put it happens mr jamal so political background and it won't be made when he was sixteen years old twelve years earlier in order
to prejudice him in front of that elderly up white jury to demonstrate that he was a military and therefore should get the death penalty because politics joe i think that we also wanted to focus in on some of these comments that are being made and at least your response for me on that since i was there the ineffectiveness of the house of this business about his not is not being offended is a bunch of hogwash sonny jackson been an incredibly good job in an incredibly difficult situation because the army with jamal just as you saw and in your videos we talk in general he reviews to allow this man to do his own job dictated the witnesses decide it was one on one and to defend himself and when because of his conduct and his behavior was rejected
from that reacted to that you must look at the individual at the time both on the time of the facts and the time of the trial and tony jackson despite everything that his client privacy didn't cross examine each and every witness very early and went through all the appropriate ways this by jamal's demand that he has no questions attempting i think to create or so what we had again and i think all of the ladies and gentlemen should know this in this system of justice if a defendant decides to destroy himself in his behavior and in his approach whether he's just sweating because he doesn't like the system or refuses to recognize the judge or the law or wants john africa to be seated which he did it beside him instead of a lawyer if he insists on doing all of this you cannot write we expect an individual
thirteen years later to claim are my council was in effect if anything for someone who is so much of a strong character that doesn't seem to do justice question for upper limb a wine glass to park west and that would actually be better directed to be a trial attorney weeks to imagine so if you the one answer would just go to the floor the two part question why didn't know me a state his innocence or sick or get his side story at the trial and why wasn't his brother a question at the trial presumably is his brother out as they are and in the end would have a version of the story i'll answer questions quickly of course there is an image that's been promulgated hear me and never did when his innocence if you look at the trial record you'll see that the first
opportunity had to address the jury it was during the penalty phase and he did read a statement to the jury and he told that jury not wants what the whites i am innocent of these charges i've heard it said many times a white in the ever claim his innocence the trial record reflex technique did you get into the jury in front of a jury and he said it was secondly why wasn't his brother called i had an opportunity recently to meet with his brother's attorney his brother was also charged he was charged with an assault on the officer because witnesses claim that's brotherhood punch the officer in the altercations and the officer then drew his wife wife and was beating the brother as mr jamal drove up so he was charged
with an assault on the officer and he faced the possibility of be charged as a co conspirator on accessories in the murder of the officer so he had a fifth amendment right not to testify and he was advised by his attorney not to testify not to appear as a witness and not testify and so that's what happened with respect to with respect to the rather vote may also at this he pled guilty plea guilty to simple assault and resisting arrest he was given a probationary sentence before the trial which meant that his trial was not going to take place after mr jamal straw so to that extent when it really expands reasoning when they say he had a fifth amendment right you have to get an mri you are charged with a crime or
appeared there's some basis to believe that there is some criminal activity yes i wanted him to take that stand for the defense yes i wanted to cross examine to determine whether or not the highly coincidental action that took place at four am was not a conspiracy i have no evidence of that we're hoping that someday somewhere down the line no longer articles written that explains the whole process of what happened in the first trial in a new deal but we haven't seen that kind of reporting bias <unk> question you tell me why they were fired fire fire casings industry you're most welcome that is an issue that will be addressed in the new trial as i pointed out all we're doing at this point is showing the errors that occurred in the first trial there are many issues which i didn't go into
a bowl which will be part of a defense and a new trial but joe when you said that you had there was evidence here connecting that's gone to the bullet that was found an officer faulkner i must say that iran experts said they could not match that bullet to the gun dissent that will let me explain to you what i meant and what he said and also talk to hear what they had said his beak was projectile was so damaged they could not make a one hundred percent match to that specific weapons but what they have said is number one it was a thirty eight caliber number two it was it had the same kind of not kind of the same right glowing characteristics they went to sell a rightward twist which is that there are millions of guns in philadelphia that
were thirty eight nations like not just a writer douglas we're talking about right wing characteristics the size and nature of that they were the same from his gun which was certainly different from the data brokers also the same kind of projectile which was used there was a threat of federal title projectile which which matches federal casings which were in the particular weapons also even mind there was evidence that those five casings in tomorrow's were fired absolutely one hundred percent from that weapon attorney joseph mcgill former philadelphia district attorney and prosecutor at the mayor abu jamal's nineteen eighty two trial of you have a question or comment or suggestions asked a future and black america programs write us also let us know what radio station you heard this over view than opinions expressed on his program are not necessarily those
of the station or the university of texas at austin and do we have the opportunity again for production assistant chris paulson and i'd be a technical producer david alvarez i'm jenelle hansen jr thank you for joining us today and please join us again next week cassette copies of this program are available and maybe purchase by writing in black america cassettes communication building the ut austin austin texas seventy seven one to ask in black america cassettes communication ut austin austin texas seventy seven wanted to do from the university of texas at austin this is the longhorn radio network fb i'm jan ellison jr joined me this week on black america i ask again
Series
In Black America
Program
National Association of Black Journalists, Mumia-Abu-Jamal Case, Part 3
Producing Organization
KUT Radio
Contributing Organization
KUT Radio (Austin, Texas)
AAPB ID
cpb-aacip/529-tt4fn1256w
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/529-tt4fn1256w).
Description
No description available
Created
1996-11-01
Asset type
Program
Genres
Interview
Topics
Social Issues
Race and Ethnicity
Rights
University of Texas at Austin
Media type
Sound
Duration
00:30:12
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Credits
Copyright Holder: KUT
Host: John L. Hanson
Producing Organization: KUT Radio
AAPB Contributor Holdings
KUT Radio
Identifier: IBA01-96 (KUT Radio)
Format: 1/4 inch audio tape
Duration: 0:28:00
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Citations
Chicago: “In Black America; National Association of Black Journalists, Mumia-Abu-Jamal Case, Part 3,” 1996-11-01, KUT Radio, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed March 9, 2021, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-529-tt4fn1256w.
MLA: “In Black America; National Association of Black Journalists, Mumia-Abu-Jamal Case, Part 3.” 1996-11-01. KUT Radio, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. March 9, 2021. <http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-529-tt4fn1256w>.
APA: In Black America; National Association of Black Journalists, Mumia-Abu-Jamal Case, Part 3. Boston, MA: KUT Radio, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-529-tt4fn1256w