NBC's Today Show newly discovered Mumia Abu-Jamal photos

[annm4peace]

Today's December 6 broadcast of NBC's Today Show, the highest rated morning news show in the country, featured the newly discovered Mumia Abu-Jamal / Daniel Faulkner crime scene photos taken by press photographer Pedro P. Polakoff.
NBC's Today Show Spotlights New Mumia Abu-Jamal Crime Scene Photos

by Hans Bennett, Abu-Jamal-News.com

--View the show's overview and video online.

"There are some photographs that have been released by supporters of Mumia, and they were taken by a freelancer named Pedro Polakoff. The supporters say that these photos show a policeman holding two guns in his bare hand, contradicting the officer's trial testimony that he had preserved ballistics evidence. Another shows your husband's hat on top of a car, and not on the sidewalk as it is in the official police photo of the crime scene. A third shows a blood-stained sidewalk where the shooting took place, but does not show any signs of the marks in the concrete that might have occurred if your husband had been shot from above as prosecutors contended. The defense attorney says that he can 'have a field day' with these photographs if a new trial..." --Matt Lauer, Today Show co-host.

Today's December 6 broadcast of NBC's Today Show, the highest rated morning news show in the country, featured the newly discovered Mumia Abu-Jamal / Daniel Faulkner crime scene photos taken by press photographer Pedro P. Polakoff. The photos had been completely ignored by the mainstream media (only published by The SF Bay View), until a Dec. 4 Reuters article reported on a press conference in Philadelphia where the photos were presented by several prominent journalists, along with other evidence of both an unfair trial and innocence, as was also reported by The Black Commentator.

The photos were presented on the Today Show segment featuring Michael Smerconish and Maureen Faulkner, marking the release of their new book titled "Murdered by Mumia." The show followed a massive media-activist campaign that was launched weeks before by supporters of Abu-Jamal to "ensure fairness" on the Dec. 6 program. A large group of Mumia supporters gathered outside the show, and passed out flyers challenging the statement made at the "Murdered by Mumia" website that he "was unanimously convicted of the crime by a racially mixed jury based on: the testimony of several eyewitnesses, his ownership of the murder weapon, matching ballistics, and Abu-Jamal's own confession."

Murdered by Mumia: A Police Widow's Fight For Justice?

The title used for the show, "Murdered by Mumia: A Police Widow's Fight For Justice," certainly could have been better, since it does serve to equate "justice" with executing Mumia, because that is Faulkner's stated goal. However, after getting past this problematic title, it became clear that this would not be the typical biased mainstream media report on this controversial and emotionally charged case, as we have seen with past shows like ABC's 20/20.

Co-host Matt Lauer introduced the show by reporting that "On December 9th, 1981 a Philadelphia police officer was shot and killed while serving in the line of duty. A man named Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted of the murder and sentenced to death. To this day he maintains his innocence. To some he is a cold-blooded killer, to others he's a political prisoner."

After Lauer's short introduction, the set-up piece begins with video and narration by NBC's Rehema Ellis. While showing video footage of Mumia and numerous demonstrations supporting him, the narrator states that "there have been rallies and fundraisers for a man, many say was framed by a racist legal system." While displaying the new photos, the narrator reports, "now supporters say there is new photographic evidence that should lead to a new trial," followed directly with a quote from attorney Robert R. Bryan, that "the jury only saw one side of the coin."

As the report progressed, it became clear that this was not the typical report from the mainstream media, as expressed in several ways:

1. NBC honestly reported how Abu-Jamal remains in his death-row cell despite the 2001 federal court decision overturning the death penalty.

2. The recognition that "to this day he maintains his innocence" was atypical. Often coverage repeats as fact, the false claim that Mumia has never proclaimed his innocence.

3. The footage of various demonstrations and supporters for Mumia was fairly extensive, and not presented in a demeaning way (as is usually done with labels like "Hollywood Chic," which serve to trivialize supporters as ignorant or naive dupes. They recognize that Mumia does have strong support around the word, and there is footage of Pam Africa, coordinator of Mumia's international support network (ICFFMAJ), speaking at a demonstration: "It's a righteous cause. That's why you see people here from Belgium, France, Germany, and South Africa."

After the interview with Faulkner and Smerconish begins, footage is shown of the large demonstration in support of Mumia, while Lauer says: "I want to show people a live shot outside our studio right now and show them that there is a fairly substantial protest right across the street from our studio. These people got up early in the morning, came from someplace to express their views that this man is innocent. Why do you think they're here if they don't truly believe that?"

Faulkner answers: "They are trying the case in the court of public opinion, and not in the court of law. That is why I think people need to read the book. It's all there. My life, the facts, what happened the night my husband was murdered. It's all in the book."

Lauer then cites attorney Robert R, Bryan, as saying that "when the decision came down in 1982, there were constitutional issues, racism, injustice, and evidence tampering," then further quoting Bryan as saying that Smerconish is an opportunist.

In response, Smerconish cites the fact that he is not making any money from the book, but Lauer interrupts him, saying "maybe he's not talking about financial gain," but rather about "status and attention." After Lauer asks this, they show a close up of Maureen Faulkner where she appears to be glaring at Lauer.

The Crime Scene Photos

At this point, Matt Lauer brings up the new evidence: "There are some photographs that have been released by supporters of Mumia, and they were taken by a freelancer named Pedro Polakoff. The supporters say that these photos show a policeman holding two guns in his bare hand, contradicting the officer's trial testimony that he had preserved ballistics evidence. Another shows you husband's hat on top of a car, and not on the sidewalk as it is in the official police photo of the crime scene. A third shows a blood-stained sidewalk where the shooting took place, but does not show any signs of the marks in the concrete that might have occurred if your husband had been shot from above as prosecutors contended. The defense attorney says that he can 'have a field day' with these photographs if a new trial..."

Cutting off Lauer, Smerconish makes no attempts to challenge any of these stated facts. He says "This is the outrage. For 26 years, these canards have enabled the manipulation of the process. It’s as reliable as the fact that Christmas is on the 25th of December, that they will come up with something every year. One year it was a guy who stood up and said, 'I know who murdered Danny Faulkner--I did it,' and the defense lawyers thought he was preposterous. Another year, there was a guy who said he was there and that the dying words of Danny Faulkner were "get Maureen, get the children," when everyone agrees that he died instantly, and unfortunately she never had the chance to have children with Danny. Where does it stop?"

Maureen asks "where have these pictures been for 26 years? I mean, where have they been? Why hasn't this man come forth sooner than now."

Lauer then asks his final question: "Maureen, when you're alone with your thoughts at night, when you even see pictures of the protests like the one we have across the street, does it ever cross your mind that perhaps they're right? Do you ever allow yourself to consider the fact that perhaps he didn't do it?"

Faulkner's response? "No. He murdered my husband in cold blood and there is no doubt in my mind. Absolutely no doubt."

Where Have These Pictures Been For 26 Years?

Smerconish did not try and challenge anything factually about the photos, but rather shifted the topic to two completely unrelated witnesses. In contrast, Faulkner addressed them directly by asking why it took 26 years for the photos to emerge publicly.

I asked German author Michael Schiffmann (who discovered them in 2006) to respond to this statement from Faulkner. Dr. Schiffmann says: "Indeed she has a point here. The reason it took so long is that the DA didn't want these photos, indeed didn't want to have anything to do with them and actually deep-sixed them. We can ask, why? Their authenticity is not in question as several of them appeared in the papers at the time. They didn't want them on account of what they might show, and investigation that was incredibly sloppy and manipulative. Their lack of interest - and the fact that they didn't inform the defense - alone might be reason for a new trial, as correctly pointed out by Linn Washington at the Dec. 4 press conference in Philadelphia."

This issue of the delay, was one of the central discussions at the Dec. 4 Journalists for Mumia press conference in Philadelphia. Reuters journalist John Huddle strongly and continually challenged the panelists about this delay. As you can hear in the audio from the press conference ("Parts 1 and 2) veteran journalists Dave Lindorff and Linn Washington both firmly held their ground concerning the legitimacy of this story.

Huddle was apparently convinced that this is serious evidence that deserves media attention, because later that day he wrote an article for Reuters that accurately presented our stance regarding the new photo evidence and our demand for a new trial (read article).

Where Do We Go From Here?

This important show, and its recognition of the new crime scene photos must now be used to go even further. The new mainstream credibility of the photos can be utilized to kick start more media coverage and a longer, more in-depth mainstream media investigation into Polakoff's photos. Because these photos are such powerful evidence, it can only help us if the mainstream media puts these photos under intense scrutiny. Please help by contacting the mainstream media and asking them to investigate these photos further--giving them the public spotlight they deserve.

For more information about the crime scene photos, see the May 18, 2007 press release by Journalists for Mumia and the October, 2007 press release written by Princeton University Professor Mark L. Taylor of Educators for Mumia.

A full transcript of the Today Show's "Murdered by Mumia: A Police Widow's Fight For Justice" is available with an article by Geoffrey Dickens who writes critically about the show from the anti-Mumia perspective.

--Hans Bennett is co-founder (with Michael Schiffmann) of Journalists for Mumia Abu-Jamal, whose website is Abu-Jamal-News.com.


http://Abu-Jamal-News.com

[HardWorkingDem]

1. Well, some problems here....

First, do you have any idea where better images of the pictures are at? Or can be found? Better close ups would be good.

For one thing, from the images in your link, the only thing I can see is the officer does have a firearm in his hand, but he is holding it by what appears to be the wood grip. So, technically from what your link states, he didn't commit "perjury" because he apparently admitted handling the firearms, but by the wood and not metal.

Now, in this day and age, even that is not good crime scene work, but there are so many variables that have to be taken into account. For one, crime scene work back then might not have been as good as it is today.

As for divots in the road, they are not always present in shootings for a variety of reasons. For one thing, what kind of material was used in the projectiles? Was it lead? If so, then it's not necessarily going to cause divots in concrete or asphalt. Also, who can even see if they are ther or not there in the photos?

This case is riddled with so many distortions, half truths and all sorts of errors.

[hfojvt]

3. perhaps they were "sloppy" about their investigation

because they caught the perpetrator right there on the scene with his gun. How frigging much more evidence do they need?

It seems to me that Mumia supporters are very good at kicking up dust, and doing so in order to defend somebody who is pretty clearly guilty.

[HardWorkingDem]

4. One piece they've always hung their hat on..

Was at one point the forensic pathologist made a mistake and listed the bullet removed from Faulkner as being the wrong caliber and then changing it. The naysayers used this error as some form of conspiracy, when what they don't realize and refuse to believe is that a forensic pathologist is not necessarily a firearm or firearm evidence expert.

I recall people trying to make the claim that the bullet was changed because of this mistake, while it was identified to the murder weapon.

[pennylane100]

2. I had always thought he was innocent.

Hope this proves it.

[RamboLiberal]

5. Mumia is guilty as hell - I will never understand why he has become

a cause for so many. There are truly innocent on death row who need the publicity more than Mumia.

Why to this day has his brother who was there never testify for his brother's innocence?

And there are many on his side who have treated the widow Maureen Faulkner badly!

[hfojvt]

6. his brother has made a sworn statement

but it lacks credibility. It basically says that he didn't do anything, and didn't see anything, except that Mumia did not have a gun. It contradicts, in several places, Mumia's statement of the events.

http://www.freemumia.com/legal.html

Here's another perspective (seven years old)
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2000/02/mumia.html

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. Give it a fucking rest.

If you want to do something for people who've been wrongly convicted of crimes, you might start with a donation to the innocence project:

http://www.innocenceproject.org/

[HardWorkingDem]

8. Taint of Barry Scheck...

I think this is a wonderful organization, but lost respect for it over Barry Scheck's OJ Simpson trial work.

Something I will always wonder is if Scheck sold part of his soul in that trial so he could promote this wonderful organization.

[Wizard777]

10. No, OJ was not the actual murderer. He was an acessory after the fact.

The real murderer was his son from his first marriage. Jason Simpson.

[flashl]

12. huh?

[HardWorkingDem]

15. BS...

I have seen presentation after presentation on this case; OJ Simpson killed those two people.

His blood was found at the crime scene and Barry Scheck clouded the waters to fool the jury otherwise.

If you really want to know how, I can explain how.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

11. Scheck or no Scheck...

...there's no denying that the work they do is good.

[dancingme]

9. he did it AND his trial was not fair

I think Mumia shot Officer Faulkner. But he did not receive a fair trial. It has been 26 years and Faulkner's widow, Maureen, still says she "needs to see Mumia executed." That's sad. He's been behind bars for 26 years. He's not out on the streets. But she is a very sad, vengeful women who is full of hate and is pals with Michael Smerconish, a right wing radio nut who hates all "Arabs" as he calls them and thinks everyone with brown skin should be profiled at airports.

Here are some reasons why Mumia's trial was not just.

10. Pamela Jenkins. Jenkins was a former prostitute and government informant, the girlfriend of police officer Thomas Ryan. She testified at hearings last year that Ryan tried to make her falsely identify Mumia as the shooter at the time of the original trial, even though Jenkins was not at the scene of the shooting.

Jenkins' credibility was recently proved by her status as the key witness in the investigation that unraveled the massive police corruption scandal in Philadelphia's 39th Police District. Her testimony was instrumental in reversing the decisions of hundreds of cases.

9. Cynthia White. Jenkins also recently testified that Cynthia White, or "Lucky," another prostitute and the prosecution's star witness, was successfully coerced to lie on the stand in exchange for exemption from criminal prosecution - that is, being given permission to work her corner. None of the other nine eyewitnesses recall seeing White at the scene of the crime.

Jenkins on March 5, 1997 saw White, who ran away and hopped into a pickup truck driven by former Philadelphia police officers Jenkins knew. It is likely White is being hidden to this day by the police to prevent her being called to testify by Mumia's legal team.

8. More on the mysterious "Lucky." White was arrested in 1987 on armed robbery charges. However, Philadelphia homicide detective Douglas Culbreth appeared in court and successfully asked that White be released without having to post bail money, because she was "a Commonwealth witness in a very high profile case."

When Jamal's legal team sought to find her for recent hearings, the prosecution declared that she was dead. To support this claim, they produced a death certificate for a woman in another state with a different name, whose body had been cremated, and whose fingerprints did not match Cynthia White's.

7. William Singletary. Singletary was a local businessman and one of the only eyewitnesses who saw the whole incident. Police suppressed Singletary's original statement that he saw a shooter fleeing the scene - a man whom by Singletary's physical description could not have been Mumia. In a 1995 hearing, Singletary testified how he was coerced and intimidated by the police, who tore up his written statement and forced him to sign a different, false statement which they dictated. His version of events is supported by Dessie Hightower, who witnessed the 5-hour police interrogation of Singletary.

6. More witness manipulation. Veronica Jones confessed in a 1996 hearing that she was coerced by police into retracting her original statement about the case. Jones explained that she lied on the stand in exchange for receiving only probation on unrelated, pending felony charges. Robert Chobert, in a 1995 hearing, testified that he was offered a deal by the D.A.: if he retracted his claim that a shooter fled from the scene (he too described a man whom by physical description could not have been Mumia), the prosecution would reinstate his suspended cab driver's license.

5. Trial Judge Albert Sabo. Known as a "prosecutor in robes," Sabo has sentenced to death more than twice the number of people than any other judge in the country. Six former Philadelphia prosecutors have sworn in court documents that no accused could receive a fair trial in the court of Judge Sabo.

Typical Sabo responses to virtually all defense statements were "Shut up!", "Sit down!", and "Take it up with the Supreme Court!" When Mumia's court-appointed attorney Anthony Jackson objected to Mumia not being allowed to be present at Jackson's questioning of certain police witnesses on the record, Sabo replied, "I don't care about Mr. Jamal."

Stuart Taylor, Jr., in the leading law journal American Lawyer, summarized his review of the transcripts: "Jamal's trial was grotesquely unfair and his sentencing hearing clearly unconstitutional...Judge Sabo flaunted his bias, oozing partiality toward the prosecution."

4. Jury-stacking. Eleven qualified blacks were removed by peremptory challenges from the prosecution, a practice that was recently revealed as having been taught to prosecutors in a special training video tape prepared by the Philadelphia D.A.'s office in the 1980's. Mumia ended up with an 83 percent white jury (ten whites, two blacks) in a 40 percent black city.

3. Judge Sabo forcibly prevented Mumia from being present at major proceedings of his own trial, a blatantly improper act, especially in a capital case. Sabo, 76, was forced to retire this past January, but the damage has been done.

2. Trial travesties. Jamal's court-assigned attorney, Anthony Jackson, testified that he didn't interview a single witness in preparation for the trial and he informed the court in advance that he was not prepared and wished to withdraw. Jackson was so incompetent he was later disbarred. Jamal, who futilely argued throughout the trial that he did not accept Jackson as his attorney, was also denied the right to act as his own attorney.

Neither a ballistics expert or pathologist could be hired by Mumia, because the court refused to allocate sufficient funds, allowing only $150 for each of a maximum of four experts. Judge Sabo repeatedly refused to authorize additional funds. The defense investigator quit the case before the trial began. How far would O.J. get on $600?

1. According to the written findings of the medical examiner, Faulkner was killed by bullets from a .44; Mumia's gun was a .38 caliber

[I work for workers]

13. Have you ever lost someone close to you?

I can easily sympathize with Maureen Faulkner. Her husband was murdered, and his killer has become a celebrity of sorts, idolized by some of the worst kinds of activists.

Jamal's own expert ballistics witness agreed with the prosecution that his gun was the murder weapon. The claim that the bullet was a .44 is a lie spread by Mumia supporters and based on the admittedly wrong guess of the coroner.

[HardWorkingDem]

14. dancingme.....number one point...

Here is the thing.....okay, a medical examiner is not a firearms examiner. The medical examiner is NOT always qualified to state what caliber a projectile is - this medical examiner later admitted that.

Mumia's firearm shot the bullet that killed Faulkner.