Mumia Abu-Jamal’s Death Penalty Declared Unconstitutional

After 29 long years in jail, Mumia Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther, has had his death sentence overturned in what may become a landmark case, Reuters reports.

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Pennsylvania examined whether Abu-Jamal received a fair sentencing after he was found guilty of murder of Daniel Faulkner, a police officer. Not only did the court find problems in his sentencing, they declared Abu-Jamal’s sentence unconstitutional. The reasoning behind the ruling is based on testimony that revealed an agenda on the part of court staff, and especially the judge. One court stenographer recalled the judge offered to “help fry the….”

Tensions run high as his case has come to represent the debate over the death penalty and the lasting problem of racism in the criminal justice system, and arguments continue that the entire trial may have been illegitimate. Black Issues Magazine highlighted the details of Abu-Jamal’s appeal released via the Associated Press, “showing the appeal contended that the trial judge was racially hostile and that a state Supreme Court justice should not have participated in the case because he was a former prosecutor.” Though the court upheld the earlier verdict, even a transition to a life sentence would mean greater freedom within prison for Abu-Jamal.

Abu-Jamal has been an activist, radio journalist, and supporter of improvements in education and civil liberties even through his decades in prison. He actually reviewed our own Black Holocaust For Beginners, one of our several titles focusing on black history, for the Black Educator. He continues to do radio spots and write, despite efforts by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections to limit his communications. The Media Alliance, aggregating news from the Society of Professional Journalists and elsewhere, reported that “courts ruled the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections' denial of access unconstitutional on the grounds that Abu-Jamal was being unfairly targeted. Pennsylvania lawmakers responded in 1996 by passing the ‘Mumia Law’--a California-style blanket ban on face-to-face prisoner interviews.” Events like this one fueled outrage among Abu-Jamal’s supporters, and among opponents of the death penalty.

Are mistakes that are not legally recognized for decades proof of inexcusable ethical problems with capital punishment, or do you think that the flaws are an unavoidable part of an otherwise necessary system? Feel free to weigh in in our comments section below.