INTERVIEW WITH DARYLE LAMONT JENKINS ON THE MUMIA ABU-JAMAL CASE

IRC Politics.org

Daryle Lamont Jenkins, is a Free Lance Journalist, and Activist.  He was here on Wednesday, March 14, 2001. Mr. Jenkins is with One People’s Coalition from New Jersey, which was organized to protest the Nationalist (White Supremacist) Movement .
In addition to their support of Mumia, they fight Racial Profiling and Police Brutality.

    Daryle Lamont Jenkins
Following is a brief summary of the Mumia Abu-Jamal Case:
In 1981 a Philladelphia police officer pulled Abu-Jamal’s brother over and a scuffle ensued. After the initial shooting, the gunman walked up and shot again at point blank range. Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted of that murder and sentenced to die.
A key witness later recanted her testimony. Two new witnesses said they saw someone else do the shooting. His attorney at the time, said he made numerous mistakes at the trial.
There was a National Conferance for Mumia, in D.C. on February 20th, and Mumia’s case has drawn international attention.
<FreeTrade> EFNET channel #politics is honored to introduce Daryle Lamont Jenkins, a Free Lance Journalist, and Activist, as our guest tonight. He will be discussing Mumia Abu-Jamal.
Mr. Jenkins is an activist with One People’s Coalition from New Jersey, which was organized to protest the Nationalist (White Supremacist) Movement . In addition to their support of Mumia, they fight Racial Profiling and Police Brutality.
Brief Summary of the Mumia Abu-Jamal Case: In 1981 a Philadelphia police officer pulled Abu-Jamal’s brother over and a scuffle ensued. After the initial shooting, the gunman walked up and shot again at point blank range. Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted of that murder and sentenced to die.
A key witness later recanted her testimony. Two new witnesses said they saw someone else do the shooting. His attorney at the time, said he made numerous mistakes at the trial. There was a National Conference for Mumia, in DC on February 20th, and Mumia’s case has drawn international attention.
Tonight’s discussion will be moderated by Twobar and FreeTrade. If you would like to ask Daryle a question, please message Twobar (by clicking on “Twobar” on the right side of the screen) to get on to the message queue. EFNET #ircpolitics will revert to an open forum *only* after this chat is over.
And now here is our guest … Daryle Lamont Jenson! Thanks for coming Daryle! Please offer your opening statement, and let me know when you are ready to begin taking questions.

<DarrylLamontJenkins> First I would like to thank IRCPolitics for the invitation to discuss the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. I should say at the outset that I am not anyone with any special connection to the case. I am just one of millions of people around the world who has taken a look at this case and feel that at the very least, there are some questions that need to be answered before a sentence of death is carried out.

Mumia was on Death Row for thirteen years before a renewed interest in his case sparked the campaign you see today. I knew about Mumia’s case for a few years before I became active on it in June, 1995. That was when PA Governor Tom Ridge signed Mumia’s death warrant, and that sparked a firestorm of activity across the country. This was the summer when those in the entertainment industry really started getting involved and long-silent Black leaders

The only group we did not hear from was those who were in opposition, and with the exception of Accuracy in Media, a white supremacist website (long since gone), and the Pennsylvania politicians and police officers who have to address the issue, it took five years for the anti-Mumia side to even respond to the campaign. That has always struck me curious, and one of the reasons why I think along the lines that Mumia did not commit this crime and sho (balance of sentence did not appear).

For me, this is not about being anti-cop, a racist system, or even being for or against the death penalty. This is about what is right and what is wrong, and even those that believe Mumia is guilty concede that this case was handled poorly by the prosecution. The question that I and others that support Mumia ask is how poorly, and how much of it might have been intentional?

Here’s the story: In Philadelphia the worst racial tensions and police corruption took place during the term of Mayor Frank Rizzo. Mumia Abu-Jamal was a radio journalist in Philadelphia at this time, and was called the “Voice of the Voiceless”. He was the recipient of a Major Armstrong Award for radio journalism, and was named one of Philadelphia’s “people to watch” in 1981 by Philadelphia magazine.
Mumia had been a member of the Black Panther Party, and later a supporter of the MOVE organization. He was a leading critic of police violence against the minority communities of Philadelphia, practices that led to an unprecedented suit filed by the United States Department of Justice seeking to end the notorious brutality of the Philadelphia police. The FBI and Philadelphia police amassed hundreds of pages of surveillance files on Mumia, beginning

In December 1981, Mumia was shot by Officer Daniel Faulkner and almost died when he intervened in a street incident where his own brother was allegedly being beaten by that same cop. Faulkner was also shot and killed, and witnesses saw other men run from the scene. Yet when police arrived, they reportedly beat the wounded Mumia before taking him to the hospital, and he was immediately charged with murder.
Mumia’s brother and another key eyewitness were later harassed by police and driven out of town. Other witnesses changed their stories to implicate Mumia and were rewarded. The dead officer was holding the driver’s license application of a third man. But it was Mumia that the police wanted.
When people began to question the charging of Mumia, the police put forward the absurd story — two months after the incident — that Mumia had “confessed” in the hospital emergency room, and they had simply forgotten to mention it at the time or write it in their reports. The written reports and the emergency room doctor say this never happened. Mumia was then barred from most of his own trial for protesting an unprepared court-appointed attorney

In the recent hearing for a new trial, a witness used against Mumia in his first trial came forward to say that she lied under police coercion. In retaliation, she was arrested in the courtroom as she stepped off the witness stand on an old warrant from another state. Now the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled unanimously against every issue raised in Mumia’s appeal and against a new and fair trial. This takes place in the wake of massive police

For the last 17 years Mumia has been locked alone in a cell 23 hours a day, denied contact visits with his family. His confidential legal mail has been opened and reproduced by prison authorities. He was put into punitive detention for writing his book Live from Death Row, which is in its sixth printing by Addison-Wesley.

Recently the US 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals found this punishment to be unconstitutional and that prison officials had yielded to pressure from the Fraternal Order of Police. However, journalists are still prohibited from filming or recording interviews with him. As Jamal put it, “They don’t just want my death, they want my silence.”

A lot of people have heard of this case over the past two years, particularly due to the Beastie Boys/Rage Against the Machine concert in New Jersey that helped raised over $80,000 for Mumia’s defense. A lot of activity has taken place since then among both supporters and detractors, and that is where we are today. There is a scheduled conference of supporters of Mumia to take place in Washington DC on March 30-31, and there is going to be a meeting.

I am all yours. Let me have it.

<FreeTrade> I would like to start with a question or two. First of all, why is it that when Mumia represented himself in court,
He never denied killing the cop, but instead decided to make an issue of PA murder law (The law wasn’t on trial, he was).
Also I want to correct the record, of I believe 5 witness’s 3 have stood by their testimony one who recanted was a known prostitute/drug addict. I’m done, thank you.

<DarrylLamontJenkins> In his trial, he did not feel he was getting a fair trial, and he felt that no matter what he tried to do, the decision to send him up was already made. He simply did not respect the process. Whether or not that was a wise thing to do … I am of two minds on that.
As for the witnesses, the area the incident took place in was a red light district. Yes, she was a prostitute.

<O`panini> As I understand the facts of the case, it is not seriously disputed that Mumia shot and killed the officer. The only claim is that he did it in self-defense, or in defense of his brother. After all, the ballistics report is clear: the bullet came from Mumia’s gun, which Mumia still had with him. Are you disputing the ballistics report?
<DarrylLamontJenkins> Yes. The weapon that Mumia had on him was never tested to see if it was fired. That is one of the goofball mistakes the police made in investigating this case.
Whenever you hear people speak on this they note that five rounds were in Faulkner and five spent casings were in Mumia’s weapon.
never do you hear anyone say the rounds actually came from his weapon, and we will never find out for sure.

<kergai> If everyone is trying to silence Mumia, why then was he one of the commencement speakers at the University of Washington? and several other leftist Universities.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> I do recall they tried to keep and still try to keep those commencement addresses from happening. The First Amendment allows for it, as it did the benefit concert.
They did , however, take him off NPR. He had a radio show there until Bob Dole campaigned against it.

<shroom> There’s a lot of talk about conspiracy against Mumia. Where’s the physical evidence that anyone else committed the crime? Also, why has Mumia refused to explain how he ended up bleeding next to a dead police officer? As I understand it, his story has changed several times.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> Other than the weapon that was never tested, there hasn’t been any physical evidence that suggests Mumia committed the crime either. Also, as noted, the officer shot him. That has never been disputed.

<plusplusC> Assuming for discussion that Mumia is in fact not guilty, how do you overcome the political forces that potentially intimidate elected judges and politicians from taking a just course in a case like this? Police and political forces allied with them will often try to tar anyone who steps up as “pro-criminal”. Look at Ronnie Black in Missouri.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> Hence the campaign. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
One of the things I have found curious is the fact that this case is still not talked about as often as it is in Philly.
I will submit that that is the primary reason why we are still dealing with it now.
The more that started to shift however, the more those problem people start going after us!

<FreeTrade> Conversely, Assuming he is guilty, Should political affiliations and movements make it lawful to commit heinous acts ? Did he not receive his due process rights as well as a trial (Mixed race jury) and appeals ?
<DarrylLamontJenkins> FreeTrade: No way, but it is argued that he is incarcerated because of those affiliations. It is also argued that he may not have received due process.

<MiDave> If Mumia is innocent and so many things do not add up in his guilty verdict, was the jury tainted? Why wasn’t the lack of ballistic evidence brought up? Wasn’t he tested under ultraviolet light to look for gunpowder residue ? If Mumia is innocent why did Faulkner shoot him?
<DarrylLamontJenkins> MiDave: Those questions were only being asked once the evidence of this activity surfaced.
Mumia was not tested, yet another contention. There were other suspects in this case that were.

<MiDave> Guest Well, Mumia had his day in the sun … the trial was the time to state the obvious flaws in the prosecutions case.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> Finally, there was an altercation. Faulkner was defending himself, I believe that, but Mumia still might not have been the one that shot him.
And in regards to his “day in the sun” … Whenever someone points out an error on the part of the defense that put a defendant in jail, that indicates some flaws
To that end, you definitely cannot execute someone who may not deserve the punishment, let alone the verdict.

<Stingray9> The last few responses have lacked some substance to me, how does Mr. Mumia come to explain WHY he was shot? Why he didn’t argue his innocence? Instead of railing against “injustice”
<DarrylLamontJenkins> In regards to the events of that evening, he is waiting until he is granted a new trial. He says, however, that new trial or not, he will tell his story. I see it as a part of the altercation he had with Faulkner when he came up to help his brother, but I cannot tell you for sure what happened.

<Thargor-> Guest1: well, a simple question for you: Given the facts of the case, everything laid out in front of you, with the research I assume you have done, do you think Mumia is guilty of the crime?

<Guest1> No.

<foo_> Given that Mumia’s brother was the object of police inquiry, and the ammunition Faulkner was shot with matched Mumia’s gun model (whether or not it was tested), and given the eyewitness testimony, It’s reasonable to conclude he shot the officer.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> I know foo is gone, but I should point out that it can’t be “reasonable” until you can prove that it was the weapon that was used. The prosecution did not do that.

<kergai> You say that Mumia was secluded 23 hours a day, no visitation. Then you said he had First Amendment rights to speak at commencements. You cite the Bill of Rights, as if criminals still have those rights. It is dishonest to say the least. The example is the Second Amendment .. criminals lose their rights. Why is it you said he wasn’t allowed visitation, and then spoke at University commencements on a Bill of Rights issue? Are you recanting?
<DarrylLamontJenkins> Good point. I should clarify that. You are right.
He is still allowed to write, especially though all of the hoopla that was generated, but there have been some limitations to that.
Given the nature of the regular column he writes, I would think that it involves not speaking on his case. EVEN ABC had problems securing a interview.

<FreeTrade> Why should convicted murderers not have their Constitutional rights infringed? I thought that was a condition of conviction of a felony?
<DarrylLamontJenkins> The first amendment is one Constitutional right that is still protected. Which is a good thing too. Can you imagine a person trying to make his or her case for appeal without it?

<FreeTrade> Rebuttal.
My brother administers the prison system in a state as State’s Attorney. He has won cases which limit 1st amendment rights for prisoners and it’s been upheld in higher courts.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> Now I have learned something. What were the circumstances?

<FreeTrade> To clarify I should say My brother is the Senior Assistant Attorney General in charge of the legal issues with respect to a states Prison system, he doesn’t administer the prisons.
In this particular case the prisoners were denied pornography. Even soft porn.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> Ah, I know about that. That would not infringe on the convict’s ability to make is or her case, so I can understand that one.

<Thargor-> Guest, as a follow-up to my earlier question, is there a specific reason as for you to believe that h
e’s innocent, given what is out there? I’ve seen a number of sources that seem to disprove a number of “myths,” for lack of a better word, of this case, such as the gun thing, etc. I’m just curious as to your reasoning, you’re, of course, allowed an opinion as is everyone else, and are probably more educated about the smaller details than myself..
<DarrylLamontJenkins> There are so many reasons. I look at the how things were done in the courtroom, the recanting of testimony by witnesses, the atmosphere of hate that surrounds this case, the campaign against him…
That last one is really a telling blow for me.
When people tell me that Mumia had his trial and all is said and done, I have to wonder why there is such a campaign coming from the Fraternal Order of Police, Right-wing talk Show hosts, and other groups that have rallied against us simply trying to find out for certain if Mumia is guilty .
Anyway, that alone does not do it for me, but it sure concerns the heck out of me!

<ralphi> You are demanding a new trial for Mumia. If, after another full trial, he is again sentenced to death on all of the evidence permitted by law, would you continue to fight for his release? Or would you want yet another retrial? Do you think the First Amendment entitled individuals on death row to the right to leave prison to address college graduations? Or just for Mumia?
AND If the exact same circumstances surrounded the murder of, say, an African American police officer by a known and loud and bigoted racist skinhead nazi, can we count on your organization to fight for his justice as well?
<DarrylLamontJenkins> If he is granted a fair trial, and he is found guilty there is nothing left to fight.
And yes, the first amendment does grant him that right, as well as it does the right to protest it, as Maureen Faulkner did.
And If a bigot was being railroaded … two words. Randy Weaver.

<ralphi> Is there any trial that in your mind that would constitute “fair” that at the same time would constitute a guilty verdict? Or would any trial that resulted in a guilty verdict be unfair in your estimation? Was your organization at the forefront of Randy Weaver’s defense? Or were you silent on the issue?  Thank you.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> You would actually be surprised how many leftists supported Weaver. My group was not around then but I was working with a lot of people that was on Weaver’s side. We simply separated the ideology from what the law is about. There is a book called the Stolen Lives Project that lists everyone killed by Law Enforcement since 1990. Vicky and Sam Weaver is in the book, as well as the Branch Davidians.
And yes, although there are a lot of cracks in out criminal justice system, I do believe there can be a fair trial that gets to the truth. If it means someone I admire is found guilty … well that person should not have committed the crime.

<FreeTrade> Is it possible they think he is guilty and are opposed to the massive campaign to free him, Including his being called a political prisoner ? Also, Can you tell me why socialist and communist organizations have taken up his case. The reason I ask this is because I went up to a group rallying for his freedom and they were handing out socialist pamphlets at the gathering. Also RATM is a music group whose leader represents himself as a communist,
I’m wondering why so many leftists and socialist and communist organizations have taken up his cause, and if you don’t mind me asking, are you a socialist or communist ? What is the politics behind this case.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> I used to be a Marxist, but I am too much of an individual, and they kind of frown upon that. I also used to be Security Police in the Air Force!

<FreeTrade> It is the politics of the case which disturb me personally, And I’m afraid the deaths of possibly and innocent cop is overshadowed by the politics.
One more thing .. Is anyone who disagrees with the cause for Mumia automatically a racist or hate monger ?
<DarrylLamontJenkins> I am in agreement with that, Free Trade, and I have a problem with that on the other side too. Note that a lot of far rightists have called for his execution.
I will say however, that politics cannot cloud the facts of the case.

<FreeTrade> Well I am in agreement with you there, I hope politics don’t cloud the facts of the case, Thank you.
<DarrylLamontJenkins> We all need to get away from the politics, learn the facts. If I am wrong about this, I would rather know that that go by my politics.

<MiDave> Daryl, if you do not believe Mumia killed Faulkner ….. Do you have an idea of who did/would or why someone would shoot and kill a patrol officer without provocation???
<DarrylLamontJenkins> I have an idea … but considering how convoluted this case has already been, I don’t think I will help things by speculating.

<Twobar> ok, Guest1, thank you very much for coming, if you’d like to take a few minutes and give a final summary, please do

<FreeTrade> www.ircpolitics.org would like to thank our guest, Daryl Jenkins for appearing tonight, and thoughtfully responding to our questions. We will now allow him to make a closing statement and we will end the moderate discussion. Thank you Daryl for coming tonight, We appreciate it.

<DarrylLamontJenkins> Sure … Again thanks for having me. I hope I helped explain things somewhat. If not feel free to e-mail me at [email protected]. You can also reach me via my voice mail (614)640-0221.
This campaign is far from over, but by no means is it done to build hate and dissension.
If this case does anything, it should say we all need to work together to ensure a fair process in our legal system, regardless of what happens with Mumia.

<FreeTrade> Thank you all for coming tonight, This ends the Moderated Guest session. The channel will return to its normal free flowing discussion mode!