Why is Mumia Abu-Jamal in prison?

Question: Why is Mumia Abu-Jamal in prison?

Answer: Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted of capital murder in the 1981 shooting death of Officer Daniel Faulkner of the Philadephia Police Department. He was initially sentenced to death, but the sentence is under review by appeals courts.

Abu-Jamal's conviction was controversial for a variety of reasons. The prosecution's scenario rested on eyewitness testimony, all of which was problematic:

• The prosecution's star witness, who identified Abu-Jamal as the shooter, was a taxi driver who had hoped to use his testimony to leverage the terms of a prior drunk driving conviction. He later recanted much of his testimony.
• Two security officers at a hospital claimed to witness Abu-Jamal loudly and conspicuously confess to the shooting as he was being wheeled in, despite medical and police reports indicating that he was unconscious at the time.
• Other witnesses to the shooting included two prostitutes, both of whom were in a position to leverage their testimony for a reduced sentence. One later recanted; the other died while Abu-Jamal's case was under appeal.
• A defense witness claimed to observe a man running from the scene at the time of the shooting. In 1999, a man named Arnold Beverly claimed to be the "running man" and the actual murderer of Daniel Faulkner.
• The alleged murder weapon, Abu-Jamal's revolver, was not tested for gunpowder residue. Neither were Abu-Jamal's hands.

Abu-Jamal, a well-known black intellectual prior to the shooting, became even more of a celebrity after his conviction due to the prosecution's sloppy case and the perception that the conviction was representative of a criminal justice system that presumes guilt on the part of black male defendants.

Critics of the Abu-Jamal conviction tend to fall into three categories:

1. Some favor letting the original conviction stand, but believe that the sentence should be reduced to life in prison.
2. Some believe that Abu-Jamal should get a new trial.
3. Some believe that Abu-Jamal should be released from prison immediately.

I personally feel that there is enough circumstantial evidence to strongly suggest that Abu-Jamal did in fact kill Faulkner, but the prosecution's case was too weak to prove the point well enough to justify a capital sentence. An appeals judge should evaluate Beverly's confession, and the recanted testimony of prosecution witnesses, to determine whether the new evidence is credible enough to justify a new trial. Even if it is not, the weak case against Abu-Jamal demands that his sentence be reduced to life in prison.