"Murdered by Mumia" (new book released on 12/6/07)

[sandman]

There are a lot of affidavits on that website.

One of them is a man who admitted to killing the police officer and signed it. The truth of his story was confirmed by a lie detector test.

One was an FBI informant who exposed police corruption in the area during that time period, including the police at this particular scene.

Another was the prosecutions key witness who admitted she lied in court under police pressure.

A court reporter who heard the judge make a racist remark during the trial.

This is pretty compelling stuff here. These individuals have all come forward and to claim something else happened altogether, in signed statements.

i have looked at the site in detail. there are blatant lies. anyone who believes he is innocent has been duped. and it's scary that so many have been duped around the globe. that the mumia machine is that powerful and so many are quick to jump on the campaign by believing those lies.

one thing that website fails to explain is that Mumia and his lawyers agreed that the "true killer" is a BS story and did not want to base his appeals on a lie.

or that mumia himself used one of his exemptions to remove a black juror, bringing the total down to 3.

or that members of MOVE openly campaigned to murder police officers.

or that his brother witnessed the entire murder and has never once stated what happened. nor has mumia have said he did not shoot the police officer. he has only claimed "i am innocent of the charges."

there have been a few researchers that looked at all the evidence. most have concluded that Mumia did it, and that maybe he should not have gotten a death sentence. i will try to find some links...alot of that was done in the 90's.

so far he is getting more than a fair appeals process. and they have reviewed more than we ever will.

[SLCPUNK]

Like I said, if that many people are giving sworn and signed affidavits then it should be looked into.

The website is created by people working for his legal defense and approved by Mumia. Why would they put something up that was a lie, and what the defendant does not want to be used? Makes no sense. You aren't giving any links or sources for your claims either. While I'm simply referencing the website.

[sandman]

http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2001/06/15/mumia/print.html

here is a portion of an in-depth article written a few years ago....


"Any one of these arguments, if accepted by the judge, would be sufficient to win Jamal a new trial. But one argument considered by the former Jamal defense team was not used.

That was a claim by a witness named Arnold Beverly, taken in a sworn deposition in June 1999, that he, and not Jamal, actually fired the fatal shot to the forehead that killed Faulkner. In his controversial book "Executing Justice," fired Jamal attorney Dan Williams says that after investigating Beverly's claims, he, Weinglass and Jamal himself concluded that the witness was not credible, and rejected using him in the habeas appeal. That decision led two other Jamal attorneys, Rachel Wolkenstein and Jon Piper, lawyers for the Spartacist League-affiliated Partisan Defense Committee, to quit the case in 1999.

Now, using his new attorneys Kamish and Grossman, Jamal has resurrected the Beverly statement and offered it as evidence of his innocence in a filing with Judge Yohn. Along with that affidavit from Beverly, the two attorneys, at their May 4 press conference, also filed with the court two dramatic sworn statements they had taken from Jamal and his brother Billy Cook, describing for the very first time, in their own words, their version of what happened on the morning of the Faulkner shooting.

The Beverly statement is stunning. Some of it is also pretty hard to believe. The 51-year-old African-American witness claims he was a hit man hired by the Philadelphia Mafia, at the behest of corrupt Philadelphia cops, to execute officer Faulkner, an honest cop feared by his criminal colleagues. Beverly says he and another unidentified person fired the fatal shots into Faulkner, who had stopped Billy Cook's vehicle, and that Jamal, who he says only ran across the street following the shooting, was himself shot by a second uniformed officer after Faulkner was already dead on the pavement. He claims he was helped to escape by another officer, who met him down in the subway tunnel where he ran after the shooting.

In Jamal's own sworn statement -- the first account, sworn or otherwise, that he has ever given of the incident that landed him on Death Row -- he offers support for this new version of the incident, saying that he only ran across the street after hearing shooting, seeing people running and seeing his brother staggering around on the street.

Cook, also making his first public statement on the incident, says he was in his car rummaging around for a registration document at the time he first heard shooting, and then says he saw his brother shot in the street. All three witnesses offer evidence that is significantly at odds with prior testimony by key defense and prosecution witnesses, who, while sometimes mutually contradictory, did tend to agree that they saw either Jamal or someone coming across the street and then heard or saw shooting.

The district attorney's office, which is arguing against the judge's even granting an evidentiary hearing concerning Jamal's habeas petition, has ridiculed the Beverly statement as being "so clearly ridiculous that it should be obvious to any fair-minded person that it is a complete fabrication."

Adding the Beverly testimony to Jamal's habeas appeal, assuming it is permitted, does not in any way erase the other claims made in the appeal drawn up by Weinglass and Williams. But if the judge were to grant an evidentiary hearing, or later, a new trial, the contradictions between what Beverly says happened and what other witnesses said during the original trial and the PCRA hearing could be used to undermine the credibility of other defense witnesses.

On the other hand, that may be a risk Jamal and his new attorneys believe is well worth taking."

[fuckin crazy]

Food for thought. The Philly Police were notoriously corrupt in the 70s. Hell, the Justice Dept. took over the Police Dept. sometime in the late 70s because of the police murders and propensity to frame subjects. I'm sure it was a lot worse than that, but that is what I rember off the top of my head.

Too, Sandman, are you aware that the Philly Police launched an attack on MOVE in the late 70s that killed 20 or 30 members of the organization. They use bombs dropped from helicopters. the resulting fires burnt 60 other houses.

[SLCPUNK]

Food for thought. The Philly Police were notoriously corrupt in the 70s. Hell, the Justice Dept. took over the Police Dept. sometime in the late 70s because of the police murders and propensity to frame subjects. I'm sure it was a lot worse than that, but that is what I rember off the top of my head.

That was one of the signed affidavits. Submitted by an FBI agent who was investigating corruption during that time. Including the police on that crime scene.

[sandman]

Food for thought. The Philly Police were notoriously corrupt in the 70s. Hell, the Justice Dept. took over the Police Dept. sometime in the late 70s because of the police murders and propensity to frame subjects. I'm sure it was a lot worse than that, but that is what I rember off the top of my head.

Too, Sandman, are you aware that the Philly Police launched an attack on MOVE in the late 70s that killed 20 or 30 members of the organization. They use bombs dropped from helicopters. the resulting fires burnt 60 other houses.

very aware. i lived through it. in 1985 the BLACK mayor ordered bombs be dropped on the MOVE compound. people like to imply that MOVE is some peaceful organization. they terrorized innocent families in their neighborhood with violence and intimidation. a few members were also convicted of killing a cop in 1978.

food for thought...4 eye witnesses saw the murder. bullets matched Mumia's gun. sworn statement and testimony by a hospital worker that Mumia said "I shot that mutherfucker and i hope he dies," no statement or testimony by Mumia's brother (the only witness not to testify or ever comment in almost 20 years that his brother did not do it).

[SLCPUNK]

food for thought...4 eye witnesses saw the murder. bullets matched Mumia's gun. sworn statement and testimony by a hospital worker that Mumia said "I shot that mutherfucker and i hope he dies," no statement or testimony by Mumia's brother (the only witness not to testify or ever comment in almost 20 years that his brother did not do it).

Does MOVE have anything to do with Mumias website?

Mumia claims that the bullet does not match the gun.

Did you read the site?

Or is this going to be another one of your arguments, where you absolutely refuse to see the movie, read the book, or take ten minutes to read and article/website, in order to discuss it?

[sandman]

again, you make bullshit statements about me. no idea why you turn everything personal.

not surprising you so easily believe one side without doing some simple research, and then accuse others of what you yourself are guilty of. you're so easily duped.

check out this site.

http://www.danielfaulkner.com/ 

from what i can see, it is totally factual with case documentation references to support all claims. Click on "Mumia Myths."

Mumia and his supporters are desperate. the case against him was strong. so over the years they have made up one lie after another.

[sandman]

the great thing about the new book is that it includes the Mumia supporter's arguments. it puts everything on the table and explains the truth (unlike the Free Mumia site). i wish his supporters would actually take time to read the book.

here's an example taken from the Daniel Faulkner website....

MYTH #1

Those who support Mumia Abu-Jamal often allege that the bullet removed from Officer Faulkner's brain was .44 caliber. Jamal's gun -- found on the ground next to him at the crime scene -- was a .38 caliber revolver. Therefore, his supporters argue, Jamal couldn't have fired the shot that killed Officer Faulkner.

BRIEF REBUTTAL

Official ballistics tests done on the fatal bullet verify that Officer Faulkner was killed by a .38 caliber bullet, not a .44 caliber bullet. The fatal .38 slug was a Federal brand Special +P bullet with a hollow base (the hollow base in a +P bullet was distinctive to Federal ammunition at that time). It is the exact type (+P with a hollow base), brand (Federal), and caliber (.38) of bullet found in Jamal's gun. Additionally, tests have proven that the bullet that killed Officer Faulkner was fired from a weapon with the same rifling characteristics as Jamal's .38 Caliber revolver. Further, Jamal's own ballistics expert, George Fassnacht, conceded in his 1995 PCRA testimony that the fatal bullet was not .44 caliber, and that it was most "likely" a .38. Although the D.A.'s officer offered in open court to let Jamal's attorneys test the fatal bullet, they refused this offer, and have never offered any alternative test results to counter the above evidence.

[sandman]

from Michael Smerconish....


Murdered by Mumia just made the New York Times extended best seller list, and will be in the 20th position in the list dated December 30, 2007.  Thank you so much for your support of this book.  Last Friday, upon her departure from Philadelphia, at the end of our intensive book signing schedule, Maureen Faulkner was elated about the success of the book, and told me she was going home to celebrate her most enjoyable Christmas in the 26 years since Danny died.  This news will guarantee her holiday happiness.  The book remains for sale everywhere, and all author proceeds will continue to benefit Maureen's not-for-profit which supports the education of the children of murder victims in Philadelphia.

Thank you.

[SLCPUNK]

again, you make bullshit statements about me. no idea why you turn everything personal.

 

If you think "personal" is me telling the truth then I'm sorry. You do it all the time, refuse to read, or watch a movie, then want to argue against it. Kinda dumb really.

[sandman]

again, you make bullshit statements about me. no idea why you turn everything personal.

 

If you think "personal" is me telling the truth then I'm sorry. You do it all the time, refuse to read, or watch a movie, then want to argue against it. Kinda dumb really.

all the time??? give some examples. names some things i haven't read, or movies i haven't watched that i have argued against.

or are you just bitter cause you've been duped again?

[SLCPUNK]

Duped by what? Duped again? This coming from one of the biggest Bush supporters here, the guy who was so gung ho to go go into Iraq over pretend WMD?  You're telling me I've been "duped again", huh? Duped should be your middle name.

Like I said already, I guess his lawyer(s) , Nelson Mandella, and all the other people who provided signed statements are all liars. Is that what you are saying? These people are all being "duped" or are part of the liars club, right?

Give you examples of your behavior? Puulease. You are pathetic man. A pathological liar, who contradicts himself, often times in the same thread. Just about anything I've ever argued with you on: Iraq, Michael Moore, Global warming etc, you refused to read or watch the movie. But you sure would argue against it all day long. Myself? I actually prefer to READ both sides, then come to a conclusion. I read both sides on this, and feel that enough people have come forward with credible evidence (repeating myself yet again, so boring, you guys are all the same) to be heard again in a court of law. It also sounds his case was not held under fair circumstances (corrupt police, jury not of his peers, prejudice judge) which would be cause for another day in court.

But go ahead and pretend I didn't make my case clear already, do what you always do, ask me to repeat it all again. I bet you don't even read my posts either, just like you won't read anything else. LOL, you really are something else man.

[sandman]

so you have no examples. you can't name one movie that i refused to watch. what a shocker. 

you raised an issue with the bullets earlier, and i was able to quickly prove that it was a LIE. 

it's so pathetic that you are doing exactly what you accuse me of. you have only read websites run by people who want to get him out of jail, without looking at what the prosecution has argued.

and even after i PROVED that there are blatant LIES on those sites, you still take their claims as the truth. for example, there's no "evidence" provided to support these claims. hence, you have been duped. 

[Perfect Criminal]

Wow, how did this become so contentious?

No offense Taint, but you'd be laughed out of any debate if you used evidence from a website run by the supporters of the accused to make your points.  This guy no doubt killed Faulkner.  Would you argue that Bush made the right decisions on Iraq if a conservative website sited testamonies and opinions by Bush supporters?  Of course not.  The legal system worked here.  Don't let your hatred of sandman cloud your judgement.  No one is arguing that if there is sufficent reason, then the guys deserves a retrial.  But there is no lock solid evidenced that lends credence to a retrial.  Stating that there were 10 whites and 2 blacks in a jury is not a reason.  Look at what the mostly black jury in the OJ case did. 

The shame of it all is that our tax dollars are being wasted on the defense and the imprisonment of this cop killer.  People like this should be put to death and our tax dollars should not be used to keep him alive in my opinion.

[fuckin crazy]

Did you read the whole thread? Philly Police were the most corrupt organization in the nation when this crime occured. Ballistics evidence isn't credible when corruption is involved. Ever hear of a "throw down"? I don't kow this case, but I wouldn't trust anything the Philly cops did in the 70s.

[Axl4Prez2004]

Sandman, I don't agree with your posts all the time, but on this one I'm with you.  Mumia should rot in a cell for the rest of his life.  That's just my opinion and just how accurate that is, you'll have to ask Booker.    I kid, I kid.

[sandman]

Did you read the whole thread? Philly Police were the most corrupt organization in the nation when this crime occured. Ballistics evidence isn't credible when corruption is involved. Ever hear of a "throw down"? I don't kow this case, but I wouldn't trust anything the Philly cops did in the 70s.

why is it so hard for people to understand that those websites are run by the scum of society???

it's funny how it seems like all police departments are labeled "corrupt" by most defendents.

but let's assume that the philly police department WAS corrupt. how does that effect this case? surely you're not gonna argue that every defendent is innocent simply because there was some corruption in the department. obviously there were still crimes taking place.

but there is ZERO evidence to suggest that that played a part in this case. and that's why the argument has no weight. and to suggest it did is just plain lazy on your part. it's the obvious argument. it's so easy to throw that one out there.

axl4 prez - you live near philly so i'm guessing you've heard or researched the details of the case. the TRUTH regarding the case. and like you, anyone that has taken the time to research the FACTS, ends up KNOWING that he is guilty and that he had a fair trial.

[fuckin crazy]

I don't know if the guy is guilty or not, but I think enough questions have been raised that he deserves a new trial. I have a lot of mixed emotions concerning capital punishment, but if anyone should be eligible, it would be a cop killer.

Don't put me in the crowd that "the police are always wrong". I have friends that are cops, and I have been known to drink at the FOP. I know for a fact that Louisville Metro are one of the most professional organizations in the country.

[SLCPUNK]

No offense Taint, but you'd be laughed out of any debate if you used evidence from a website run by the supporters of the accused to make your points.  This guy no doubt killed Faulkner.  Would you argue that Bush made the right decisions on Iraq if a conservative website sited testamonies and opinions by Bush supporters?  Of course not.  The legal system worked here.  Don't let your hatred of sandman cloud your judgement.  No one is arguing that if there is sufficent reason, then the guys deserves a retrial.  But there is no lock solid evidenced that lends credence to a retrial.  Stating that there were 10 whites and 2 blacks in a jury is not a reason.  Look at what the mostly black jury in the OJ case did. 

The shame of it all is that our tax dollars are being wasted on the defense and the imprisonment of this cop killer.  People like this should be put to death and our tax dollars should not be used to keep him alive in my opinion.

Please quit taking what I'm saying and try to twist it around. I've made myself quite clear. If enough people have signed statements making claims to the contrary, it deserves to be held up to the light. Again, court reporters are not "blind supporters". It's a court reporter who overheard a judge make racial slurs before the trial-quite relevant in my book. An FBI agent is not a "supporter".  It's an FBI agent who investigated police corruption during that time, including but not limited to, the police that made the arrest in this case. Also, very important.

A jury of your peers is owed to a defendant in this court system. In a racially divided country such as ours, it sure as hell outa be.

Any finally, please, don't impress yourselves here. Nobody blindly hates Sandman so much that it's clouding my " judgement". I think about him about as much as the last time I flushed the toilet. Gotta hand it to you on the "blind hatred" thing though. It's the lazy man's argument, also applied to those who spoke up against loser Bush's agenda over the years. Let me ask you something....think anybody really buys your bullshit?