HOME
your socialist home on the internet
ABOUT US
who we are, what we do
NEWS & VIEWS
newspaper, articles, statements
THEORY
what is socialism, marxism
JOIN US!
joining, getting active
CONTACT US
branch directory
Y.S.A.
youth 4 socialist action
F.I.
socialists around the world
CULTURE
poetry, reviews, commentary
HISTORY
events & people from the past
SCIENCE
science, dialectics & more
LINKS
other important sites
WHAT'S NEW
listing of what's been recently added
Michael Moore Strikes Low Blow Against Mumia
By JEFF MACKLER and LAURA HERRERA
Until recently Michael Moore, actor, Academy Award-winning filmmaker,
("Bowling for Columbine" and "Roger and Me") muckraking author and
popular
lecturer, has been a respected figure whose political commentary
appealed to
a wide range of audiences.
In 1995 his name appeared prominently among signers of a full-page ad
in The
New York Times demanding a new trial for U.S. political prisoner and
innocent death row inmate, African American journalist Mumia Abu-Jamal.
The
ad detailed the numerous violations of Mumia's democratic rights that
led to
his frame-up murder conviction and the associated worldwide movement
for his
freedom and/or a new trial where the repressed and new evidence proving
his
innocence could be presented.
Moore's public speeches have scored the Bush administration's war
policies
and the corrupt dealings of Bush's corporate billionaire cabinet
officials.
His courageous use of the Academy Award stage to denounce Bush won him
the
admiration of millions and the enmity of supporters of the status quo.
His stature is reflected in the astronomical sales figures of his
books,
past and present, in the U.S. and worldwide. Moore's "Stupid White Men"
appeared on The New York Times "best sellers" list. His last two books
are
rated "one" and "two" in Germany, with similar results across the
globe.
Thus, when a figure with Moore's standing decided to reverse his
position
and side with those who seek to murder Mumia, there is little doubt
that a
major blow has been struck against this innocent man's 22-year struggle
for
justice and freedom.
Moore's attack was published on page 189 of his best-selling and
newly-released book, "Dude, Where's My Country?" It appears in a
section
advising his readers how to speak effectively to conservatives.
Moore states: "Mumia probably killed that guy [Police Officer Daniel
Faulkner]. There, I said it. That does not mean he should be denied a
fair
trial or that he should be put to death. But because we don't want to
see
him or anyone executed, the efforts to defend him may have overlooked
the
fact that he did indeed kill that cop. This takes nothing away from the
eloquence of his writings or commentary, or the important place he now
holds
on the international political stage. But he probably did kill that
guy."
Moore's logic is terribly flawed and contradictory. His failure to
present
even the most minimal evidence to substantiate his assertion marks a
fundamental break with his tradition of presenting facts to buttress
his
arguments.
Readers should note the three "killing" references in Moore's
statement.
Two, the first and last, assert that Mumia "probably" killed Faulkner.
But
the second reference is unqualified. It states that the efforts to
defend
Mumia may have overlooked "the fact that he did indeed kill that cop."
This is the most extreme and explicit statement in any book dealing
with
this subject. Mumia's most critical and analytical biographers all
conclude
at worst, like David Lindorff, in his book "Killing Time," that he
"leans
toward innocence." Dan Williams, Mumia's former attorney, who was fired
by
Mumia for publishing a book on the case, "Executing Justice," without
Mumia's permission, concludes that Mumia is innocent.
Having declared Mumia emphatically guilty, Moore's assertion that Mumia
should get a "fair trial" is reminiscent of the old-fashioned cowboy
movies
where the bad guys control the town and the judge and proclaim, "Let's
give
him a fair trial and then hang 'em!"
If Moore seriously believes that Mumia did not receive a fair trial, as
he
implies in his statement, one can only wonder how he could conclude
that
Mumia is guilty. It seems obvious that a fair trial is the minimum
prerequisite for an objective judgment.
The trial record and an extensive investigation convinced Amnesty
International that Mumia did not receive a fair trial. Amnesty
questioned
most every aspect of the proceedings against Mumia and could only
conclude
that the verdict had to be fatally flawed.
A few basic facts need restating:
1) Mumia was excluded from a majority of the proceedings of his own
trial.
He was excluded because he repeatedly requested permission to exercise
his
constitutional right to represent himself. He was denied this right.
2) In violation of Supreme Court rulings in the Batson case, 11 of the
14
Black jurors available were excluded in a trial presided over by the
notorious Judge Albert Sabo, the "hanging judge" who had sentenced more
people to execution, 31, than any judge in the U.S. Twenty-nine of the
31
executed were Black.
3) Philadelphia District Attorney Ronald Castille authorized a training
tape
for Philadelphia prosecutors instructing them on how to exclude Black
jurors, which they did. Castille, subsequently promoted to the
Pennsylvania
Supreme Court, refused to recuse himself when Mumia's case was appealed
to
his court. He thus assumed the role of prosecutor (racist prosecutor
would
be a preferable term) and judge.
4) Terri Maurer Carter, an award-winning court stenographer, overheard
Judge
Sabo state in his courtroom antechambers in reference to Mumia's case,
"Yeah, and I'm going to help 'em fry the nigger." Carter's testimony
was
excluded by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on the spurious grounds that
Sabo's "alleged" racism was litigated and rejected in proceedings that
took
place six years before Carter's affidavit was submitted.
5) The testimony of Cynthia White, the chief police witness against
Mumia,
has been thoroughly repudiated. None of the several witnesses on the
murder
scene ever saw White. White admitted to Evette Williams, according to
Williams’ sworn affidavit, that White was not on the murder scene, did
not
see Mumia, and was forced, via police threats of a long-term prison
sentence, to implicate Mumia. But Williams’ testimony was excluded from
court consideration.
6) Police informant Pamela Jenkins testified that Philadelphia police
pressured her to falsely state that Mumia was the killer. Jenkins
refused to
do so. Veronica Jones, a prostitute vulnerable to police intimidation,
testified in 1995 at Mumia's Post Conviction Relief Act hearing that
her
1982 court testimony, which had helped to convict Mumia, was a lie—the
direct result of police intimidation.
7) The testimony of taxicab driver Robert Chobert, the prosecution's
other
supposed eyewitness, was repudiated by a defense investigator whose
affidavit affirmed that Chobert admitted he had lied when he stated in
court
that he was present at the murder scene. Other witnesses present refute
Chobert's claim that his cab was on the murder scene.
No other witness saw the cab. Chobert, an arsonist, had been previously
convicted of throwing a Molotov cocktail onto a schoolyard. He was
allowed
by Philadelphia police to continue driving his cab, even though his
license
had been revoked.
8) The alleged confession of Mumia has been proven to be false, refuted
by a
series of witnesses and other evidence excluded from jury
consideration.
9) And finally, Arnold Beverly, a mob hitman and police collaborator,
confessed that he, not Mumia, had killed police officer Faulkner.
Beverly's
testimony and request to appear in court has been rejected on the
grounds
that it was submitted too late for consideration.
These are but a few of the facts and constitutional issues that should
have
led Michael Moore to think twice before adding his substantial
political
weight to the prosecution's frame-up effort.
There is some evidence that Moore has reconsidered his damaging
accusation.
An artist at New York's Pacifica radio station, WBAI, states that she
wrote
to Moore to express her displeasure at his attack on Mumia. She reports
that
Moore responded as follows:
"hi, thanks for writing. i can see now that i was being too flip and
was
trying to make a larger point that had nothing to do with mumia. i have
long
supported his efforts for a new trial and will always oppose his and
anyone's execution. please accept my apologies.”
A man of Moore's stature should understand that the damage he inflicted
on
Mumia's fight for justice and freedom cannot be undone by a personal
and
vaguely worded e-mail expressing apologies. What is needed now, and
what
would clearly indicate that Moore has not departed from his previous
commitment to exposing society's injustices, is for Moore to review his
original statement and, at a minimum, reassert his belief that Mumia's
trial
was a frame-up and that therefore no conclusion regarding his guilt can
be
properly drawn.
Leaders of Mumia's defense are in the process of contacting Moore to
inform
him of the wide range of evidence proving Mumia's innocence. They have
every
right and indeed an obligation to insist that a retraction by Moore be
issued and that it be as widely circulated as the original false
accusation.
We are hopeful that Moore will accede to the facts on record and rejoin
the
struggle to win Mumia's freedom. His failure to do so can only
demonstrate
that he cannot be counted on as a source of unbiased and objective
judgment
in the future.
The article above first appeared in the December 2003 issue of Socialist Action newspaper.
(415) 255-1080 -- socialistact@igc.org |
(715) 394-6660 -- mnsocialist@yahoo.com |