COLUMN: Justice far too long deferred

From Mark Fiore's, "The Right Stuff," Fall '99 From Mark Fiore's, "The Right Stuff," Fall '99With Monday's U.S. Supreme Court decision not to hear an appeal by Mumia Abu-Jamal, leaving only a habeas corpus appeal open, the cop killer's date with death could be little more than a year away. Howled charges of an unfair trial surrounded the latest round of appeals -- but the Supreme Court, thankfully, did not take the bait. That Abu-Jamal killed Daniel Faulkner is without question. Though he has never explicitly confessed to the slaying, he has also never denied it. More importantly, the evidence of his guilt is overwhelming. In Abu-Jamal's Supreme Court appeal, Mumia's attorneys argued that his original conviction should be overturned because the trial had been unfair in several respects. The Supreme Court, though, let stand the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's 1998 ruling that the original trial proceeded fairly. In doing so, it found against the defense's claims that the trial judge improperly prevented Abu-Jamal from representing himself, that the defendant was wrongly removed from court after disrupting the trial and that he was unjustly excluded from a meeting regarding a jury member. Despite repeated judicial rejections of these claims, Abu-Jamal has attracted thousands of supporters. Unbelievably -- and pathetically, even sadly -- a cold-blooded killer has become a world-famous celebrity. Foreign dignitaries regularly call for clemency and visit Abu-Jamal on death row in Southwestern Pennsylvania. Web sites, concerts and marches have all worked to deify the demon. Last April, tens of thousands turned out for rallies in Philadelphia and San Francisco. And in 1995, an influential but apparently gullible parade of Hollywood stars, including Alec Baldwin, Spike Lee, Paul Newman and Oliver Stone, put their names on a newspaper advertisement asserting that Abu-Jamal had received an unfair trial. If only such supporters had anything to back up their protests. True, the judge at Abu-Jamal's trial, Alfred Sabo, had a pro-prosecution reputation. And the courtroom exchanges between judge and defendant were rarely friendly. But the higher courts ruled there was no evidence of wrongdoing -- except on the part of Abu-Jamal, who endlessly disrupted the proceedings. "While there are certainly instances in the record where the judge displays displeasure and/or impatience, those instances were, in large part, a direct result of obstreperous conduct on the part of [Abu-Jamal and his counsel]," the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated in its 1998 decision. "Upon review of the entire record, we cannot conclude that any of Judge Sabo's intemperate remarks were unjustified or indiscriminate nor did they evidence a settled bias against [Abu-Jamal]." Such statements abound in the court's decision. Those still rallying to demand Abu-Jamal's release from prison should consider the court's words before attending or creating further obnoxious displays in support of clemency for the convicted killer. Or perhaps they should simply take another look at the undisputed facts of the case. Just before 4 a.m. on December 9, 1981, Officer Faulkner pulled over a car near the intersection of 13th and Locust streets in Center City for what should have been a routine stop. For reasons that remain unclear, Faulkner proceeded to arrest the driver, Abu-Jamal's brother. As he began to handcuff the suspect, Abu-Jamal ran toward the officer from across the street. Opening fire, Abu-Jamal hit Faulkner once in the back. The wounded officer fired in return, striking Abu-Jamal in the chest before falling to the ground. As Abu-Jamal stood over the downed officer, he fired several more shots. One bullet shattered the officer's head. Faulkner died instantly. Just seconds passed before other officers started arriving on the scene. Abu-Jamal, sitting with a gun near his feet, was arrested. The gun, later determined to belong to Abu-Jamal, was found to cause markings consistent with those on the bullets found in Faulkner's body and elsewhere at the scene. Four witnesses testified to Abu-Jamal's guilt. More than 17 years have passed since that night. No question remains as to who killed Faulkner. No question remains as to the fairness of the trial. All that remains is one final attempted appeal before justice will finally be served.