On December 9, 1981, Wesley Cook, a.k.a. Mumia Abu-Jamal, was driving his taxi in Philadelphia when he saw that police had pulled his brother over. Jamal stopped to see why his brother was being pulled over. An altercation followed leaving Officer Daniel Faulkner dead and Jamal critically wounded. Jamal is currently on Death Row awaiting execution. Jamal?s trial was held in 1981 and since then there has been much controversy about whether the trial was fair or not. Much evidence has recently been brought forward such as witnesses were coerced and given favors, important defense witnesses and ballistics evidence were not allowed to be submitted to the jury, and Jamal?s ?confession? that was fabricated. It is imperative that Jamal gets a new and fair trial, what every citizen is promised by the U.S. Constitution, because of this evidence that could possibly free him. Mumia Abu-Jamal?s trial began on July 18, 1982 in Pennsylvania, where he pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder charges. A guilty verdict was returned at 5:30 pm on Friday July 2,1982. The State issued his death warrant on October 13, 1982 for an execution date of December 2 that same year, but Mumia was granted a stay of execution.
Since then, there have been many people and groups that have been supporting Mumia and his fight for a fair trial, such as the band Rage Against the Machine. They held a benefit concert in the spring of 1999 to help raise funds for trial costs. There have also been numerous protests, marches, and even student walkouts by supporters. On May 7, 2000, a very large fundraiser is being held at Madison Square Garden to raise more money to help this man get a new trial. One claim by the prosecution was that in the hospital, Mumia confessed to murdering Officer Faulkner to Officer Gary Bell. ?While lying nearly unconscious on the hospital emergency room floor Jamal exclaimed he had shot the deceased officer (referring to him as a mother*censored*er) and hoped that the officer would die?(academia.org).
The Essay on Trial Rcmp Ludwig Evidence
Ludwig trial put cash-strapped RCMP under scrutiny BOB WEBER EDMONTON (CP) - Wiebo Ludwig was the defendant, but many times it seemed the RCMP were the ones on trial. Eight weeks of testimony at Ludwig's oilpatch vandalism trial raised repeated questions about a police force relying on tired, outdated equipment and in danger of taking bids on its integrity. But it's not the first time. The Ludwig ...
This statement was a lie, though, now proven from other people?s statements. During the course of the trial, the jury never heard from Officer Gary Waksul, the officer who guarded Jamal at the hospital. Waksul made and signed a report that stated ?We stayed with the male at Jefferson until we were relieved. During this time, the Negro male made no comments?(iacenter.org).
Even others reported that Mumia made no comments in the emergency room such as the attending physician and Waksul?s partner, P.O. Trombetta. Trombetta stated that if anybody was in the position to hear an argument, it was his partner. When called as a defense witness, the prosecution argued that Waksul was on vacation and unavailable when in fact he was home at this time. Judge Sabo would not allow a continuance so the defense could locate him. Waksul?s testimony was very important because it discredited the prosecution witness testimony of Pricilla Durham, who claimed to have heard the confession. P.O. Waksul did not see Officer Bell among the officers who were present nor did he see any hospital employees close to Jamal. The police officers and hospital guards who claimed to have heard this ?confession? did not make any reports of it until two months after it allegedly occurred and Jamal filed police brutality reports. ?His (Waksul) testimony would have shown that law enforcement and the prosecution itself, was willing to use perjured testimony to secure a confession?(amnsesty.org). There were several witnesses that claimed to have seen the shooting or to have been in the area at the time of it: Cynthia White, Robert Chobert, Veronica Jones, William Singletary, Dessie Hightower, Deborah Kordansky, and William Cook. ?Within minutes of the shooting four witnesses, each unknown to the others, independently reported to police that a black male had fled the scene. Each gave precisely the same details as to where the fleeing man fled. They told police that the fleeing man ran eastbound?about thirty feet from the slain officer to an alleyway, which provided an obvious escape route?(mumia911.org).
The Essay on Becoming A Police Officer: An Insider's Guide To A Career In Law Enforcement
Law enforcement refers to agencies and individuals responsible for public safety, enforcing a set of norms and rules in a society and maintaining public order. It also refers to activities conducted by law enforcers such as dissuasion, detection and investigation of crime as well as apprehension of law offenders(Hess, Orthmann, & Cho, 2014). The most typical and organized form of law ...
The main prosecution witness was a prostitute named Cynthia White. Her testimony was important because she was the only witness claiming to have seen Jamal shoot Faulkner. There has been much evidence that contradict her testimony. Lawrence Boston, a retired police officer, testified that White was receiving favors after the shooting and that officers commonly use prostitutes as witnesses. ?Favors to White continued through 1987; she was never prosecuted for three pending prostitution charges and a serious felony charge because a homicide detective informed the judge of her role in the case and she was released?(iacenter.org).
Since then, White has not appeared in any Pennsylvania court and police have made no attempt to find her. ?Another witness, Veronica Jones, testified in the 1982 trial that police had told her that White was receiving favors for providing a testimony?(iacenter.org).
Also, the defense investigator could not interview White because two officers guarded her. All of this information about White was never released to the jury. Another prosecution witness was Robert Chobert. Chobert testified in court that he saw Jamal standing over Faulkner and previously heard shots fired. In his first interview, he told police that he saw the shooter run away describing him as about six foot and two-hundred to two-hundred twenty five pounds, admitting that Jamal didn?t fit this profile. ?Chobert?s testimony mysteriously changed monthly to favor the prosecution, however, the defense was blocked at trial from showing his incentive to favor the prosecution?(iacenter.org).
He changed his testimony to that the shooter only moved ten feet from the previous testimony that the shooter ran thirty feet to the alleyway. ?Perhaps the most glaring evidence of police manipulation of witnesses to deprive the defense of evidence concerning the flight of a third person from the scene came from the PCRA hearing testimony of Veronica Jones?(grinnel.edu).
The Essay on A Single Man Mise-en-scene
How has the mise-en-scene been constructed in the opening of A Single Man in order to communicate particular images to the audience? In the opening of the film, A Single Man, mise-en-scene has been used to communicate different images and messages to the audience. This has been done through the use of setting; performance and movement; and props and costumes. There are four different settings in ...
Jones originally reported to police that she had seen two black men jogging from the scene, which was put into a report. Having possession of this police report, the defense questioned Jones about her observation while under oath. She denied ever seeing anyone run from the scene and claimed that she was high on marijuana at the time of her interview. At the 1996 PCRA hearing, Jones explained that her story had changed because she had little choice. Shortly before Jamal?s trial, Jones was arrested on serious felony robbery and gun charges. ?While in jail, Jones received a visit from two police detectives who had urged her to change her testimony to aid the prosecution. They told her that she face at least one decade in prison, a scenario she regarded as unimaginable, particularly because such a sentence would separate her from her three infant children?(freemumia.org).
The detectives then told her if she testified that Jamal was the shooter her charges would be dropped. During the 1982 trial, Jones decided to take the middle path. She testified that she saw a fleeing man and pinned blame on no one, which obviously made police happy because she never served a prison term. However, at the 1996 hearing Jones confessed all of this and said she was finished lying. ?Witness William Singletary, a black Philadelphia businessman and decorated Vietnam veteran with friends on the police force, reported to police at the scene that the man who shot the officer was a third black man who ran from the scene?(iacenter.org).
Immediately after the shooting, police brought Singletary to the station for questioning. In his report, he specifically stated that Jamal was not the shooter. At the 1995 PCRA hearing Singletary testified that the officer ripped up his statement indicating that Jamal was not the shooter and that the shooter had fled. ? Police then coerced Singletary, after five hours of badgering, into signing a false statement indicating he did not see the shooting so Singletary was never sought as a trial witness because the falsified statement was the one turned over to the defense?(iacenter.org).
If Singletary?s original statement had been presented, he would have been able to testify that he saw White nowhere near the scene at the time of the shooting and that right after the shooting, she asked him ?what happened?.
The Essay on Police One British Men
The Associated Press Updated: 3: 03 a. m. ET July 28, 2005 LONDON - Anti-terrorist officers investigating the July 21 attempted attacks in the British capital arrested nine men in south London Thursday. Scotland Yard police headquarters said the men were arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 at two properties in the neighborhood of Tooting. They were being held in a central London police station. ...
Dessie Hightower, a witness who was in a nearby parking lot, testified that he saw a black male with dreadlocks running from the direction of the shooting. Hightower?s testimony was the only evidence of a fleeing man allowed to be presented to the jury. ?Hightower was subjected to police pressure to change his story, including being subjected to a polygraph test during the course of six hours of questioning after having told police that he saw a man fleeing the scene. In polygraphing Hightower, law enforcement never broached the pivotal issue, the issue of a man seen running away from the scene, thus giving the rise to the compelling inference that the polygraph was administered to intimidate the witness?(iacenter.org).
Police did not polygraph any other witnesses even though they all had criminal records, while Hightower was a college student with a clean record.
On the body of the slain Faulkner, a driver?s license application was found belonging to a man named Arnold Howard, which brings up the question of could he be the third and fleeing man. ?At the 1995 PCRA hearing, Edward D?Amato, a retired police captain called by the prosecution, confirmed that police suppressed the fact that a driver?s license application belonging to a third man, Arnold Howard, was found on the slain officer, and that some police initially pursued the theory that a third man fled the scene?(iacenter.org).
According to Howard?s PCRA testimony, he had given his application to William Cook?s vending partner, Kenneth Freeman, which brings the possibility of Freeman being Cook?s passenger and the fleeing man. William Singletary testified that the shooter came from Cook?s passenger door. Howard and Freeman were both taken into custody as suspects. ?In February, 1982, (just two months after the shooting) Central Division Detective Richard Ryan arrested Kenneth Freeman under unusual circumstances. Assisting Ryan in the Freeman arrest was James Forbes, a C.D. stakeout Officer who was one of the first police on the scene after Faulkner?s shooting and a key prosecution witness at the 1982 trial. In May, 1985, in the evening after the Philadelphia police bombing of the MOVE Organization, Freeman was found dead in Philadelphia under mysterious circumstances?(amnesty.org).
The Term Paper on Mumia Abu Jamal Mobilazation Police Trial
America, the land of the free, the land of the just. It is here, where people from all over the world can come for refuge from tyranny. Here, people are not judged by their color, but by who they are. Too bad it isn't true, for what you are about to read will contradict everything that America is supposed to be. Mumia Abu Jamal, a former Philadelphia journalist, was put through an unfair and ...
Deborah Kordansky, a resident of an apartment down the street from the shooting, claimed to have seen a man running down the street at about the time of the shooting. Kordansky would not disclose her exact address to police. ?She did not testify because the trial court refused to provide adequate funds for an investigator who could have located her?(iacenter.org).
William Cook, Jamal?s brother, never testified at the trial because he had the fear of self-incrimination. Cook was charged with assault on a police officer and was advised by his attorney that involving himself could risk murder charges against him. ?The defense attempted to present Cook at the PCRA hearing and said that Cook would testify that he had a passenger in his car and that the passenger was present when the officer was shot, which could help try to prove his brother?s innocence?(amnesty.org).
If the jury of this trial was able to hear some of these testimonies, not only would the trial have been a little bit fairer, but also clearly Jamal would have been found not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The above evidence would have swayed some, if not all, jurors? decisions. ?Jamal was deprived of his right to a fair and reliable determination of guilt and penalty, as guaranteed by the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution, because the State?s most important identification witnesses, Cynthia White and Robert Chobert were coaxed and coerced into providing testimony implicating Jamal?(iacenter.org).
The prosecution claims that Jamal stood over the downed officer and shot him execution style in the face with a .44 caliber gun. They also claim that Officer Faulkner?s gun trajectory was upward and he was on his back when he shot Jamal in the abdomen. At Jamal?s first trial, the defense had no expert pathologist to investigate the shooting so they could refute this. ?The prosecution?s ballistics evidence did not even establish that the gun was fired, much less that Jamal fired it. When law enforcement arrives at a crime scene within minutes of a police shooting, it is a matter of routine for officers and crime scene detectives to examine all firearms for recent firing and to test all suspects? hands for gunpowder residue. The circumstance here leaves no doubt that such tests have been performed in this case. Yet, rather than reveal the negative findings concerning the firing of the gun attributed to Jamal, and the negative findings concerning gunpowder residue on Jamal?s hands, body, or clothing, law enforcement claimed that none of these tests were performed?(iacenter.org).
The Term Paper on HIPAA Ruling In Tennessee Court
Failure to adhere to regulatory compliance can impact a litigation process, which in the case of Stevens vs, Hickman Community Hospital was prominent when the Tennessee Court of Appeals dismissed the case based on failure to comply with Tennessee’s Medical Malpractice Act and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. This paper will include an IRAC Brief that will explain ...
The medical examiner wrote in his report ?shot by .44 caliber?, which makes it impossible that Jamal shot the officer; he owned a registered .38 caliber. Even the prosecution?s own expert admitted that the bullet couldn?t have possibly come from Jamal?s gun. He wrote this on his report, but this was never presented in court. After the first trial, ?the defense hired a pathologist who determined that Faulkner?s gun trajectory was downward, which contradicts Cynthia White?s testimony and shows that she did not see what she claimed?(iacenter.org).
There are those who still believe that Jamal was given a fair trial and is guilty of the murder of Daniel Faulkner. However, the recent testimonies and evidence clearly shows that Jamal did not receive a fair trial and deserves one because his life is in danger. An innocent man could be sitting on death row. Jamal has a court date in May 2000 for an appeal to get a new trial. After the fundraiser on May 7, hopefully the U.S. Court system will grant the new trial and enough funds will be raised to pay the court costs.
Bibliography:
?Amnesty International calls for retrial?, 17 February 2000 http://www.amnesty.org/news/1999. Flynn, Dan. ?Supreme Court setback for cop killer.? http://www.academia.org/mumiabook.html. Ford, Paul Robeson. ?Questioning American Justice: The Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal.? http://www.grinnell.edu/groups/mumia/ http://www.freemumia.org. Kissinger, Clark C. ?How the Court Denied Mumai?s Right to an Effective Defense.? 12 March 2000. http://iacenter.org — ?Mumia and the U.S. Supreme Court.? 12 March 2000. http://iacenter.org http://www.mumia911.org/brief ?Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief.? 14 October 1999. http://iacenter.org
