(Please download attached files - A new Case Resource and Info Guide and a Flyer on the New Ruling)
The International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal
PO Box 19709
Philadelphia, PA 19143

OnaMOVE!
There was a pivotal ruling in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal on December 6, 2005, which has put Mumia's legal battle on the fast track. This means that the time for action is now! Mumia's last appeal ever is currently pending, so now it is more necessary than ever that we make our voices heard demanding justice. An important information packet is enclosed that will bring you up to date on Mumia's case. For those of you who are veterans in this struggle for justice, we encourage you to keep fighting, even harder now as we get to this most important stage. To those who have not been involved before, please join us in one of the most important social justice struggles of our time. This is not just a struggle around the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. This is about the death penalty, political imprisonment, police brutality, and an ever expanding prison industrial complex. This is about a person's right to speak their mind, to tell the truth without having to fear being railroaded to death row.
The December 6th ruling clearly shows the power of our movement. The State has been
trying to murder Mumia for over 24 years and every time we push the threat of death back. We should feel encouraged because Mumia has never before been this close to a new trial, but we must not let our guard down. We must fight harder! These officials do not intend to do justice for Mumia. For 24 years they have exhibited blatant bias and racism towards Mumia and they are not going to give up this easily. Just one week after the 3rd Circuit Court ruling on Mumia, the State of California executed Stanley Tookie Williams despite evidence of innocence and a massive movement for justice. Now we must be stronger than ever!
Through thick and thin Mumia has remained dedicated to his struggle for justice for all. Even while on Phase II of Death Row, only one day away from execution, Mumia was still writing, not about himself, but about struggles for justice internationally. We must give him the same commitment and loyalty that he has given to all of us. Now is the time to write articles, contact media, organize phone trees, and plan demonstrations and press conferences. Please become a part of our international network by contacting us by phone or email (preferably) so that you can quickly receive breaking news and take action. Mumia is innocent and we want him home with his family, where he belongs. We must make 2006 the year for justice for Mumia Abu-Jamal!
In Solidarity,
The International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal

Donate to the Movement for Justice for Mumia!
Checks must be earmarked “Mumia Organizing”
The National Black United Fund
40 Clinton St.
Newark, NJ 07102
USA

“Every generation should have a moral assignment, and one of ours must be justice for Mumia Abu-Jamal”
-Ossie Davis
*****************************************
MUMIA ABU-JAMAL WINS IMPORTANT COURT VICTORY

BY JEFF MACKLER

The Dec. 6 ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Third Circuit reversing two critical Federal District Court decisions in the case of innocent death row political prisoner and award-winning journalist
Mumia Abu-Jamal opens the door wider than ever for a new trial and Mumia's eventual freedom.

The court's ruling was a major blow to the Pennsylvania legal establishment, which has sought to publicly minimize the political damage it has suffered. The decision also registers a blow to reactionary provisions of the 1996 Anti- terrorism and Effective
Penalty Act that was designed to
eliminateconstitutional protections in the name of efficiency in implementing state court death penalty
decisions.

The Third Circuit granted "certificates of appealabilty" to Jamal to challenge defense alleged race and judicial bias in the 1995 Post Conviction Relief Action proceedings that were overseen by Mumia's
original 1982 trial court "hanging" judge, Albert Sabo. Sabo went to extreme lengths to keep evidence of innocence out of the court record.

The court also allowed Mumia to challenge the 1982 trial summation remarks of the state's lead prosecutor, Joseph McGill, who told the
jury, "If you find the Defendant guilty of course, there would be appeal after appeal and perhaps there could be a reversal of the case, or whatever, so that may not be final."

Mumia's lead attorney, Robert R. Bryan of San Francisco, told this writer that McGill's summation had the effect of qualitatively lowering the historic burden of proof regarding reasonable doubt and
presumption of innocence. Virtually the same remarks by Pennsylvania prosecutors in other cases have resulted in new trials.

The Third Circuit's decision is especially remarkable since, under the provisions of the reactionary 1996 Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), the court had no obligation to even consider defense challenges to the Federal District Court's denial of certificates of appealability.

When Federal District Court Judge William H. Yohn Jr. ruled against Mumia four years ago with regard to some 27 of the 29 points that the defense raised in its original habeas brief he cited in almost every
instance the strict provisions of the AEDPA. This Clinton-signed law qualitatively raised the standard required to secure a "certificate of appealability," the prerequisite for having one's appeal issues heard
by the next level of the federal judiciary - in this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Third Circuit.

With the AEDPA the presumption of innocence standard was replaced by a requirement that federal judges were henceforth required to grant a
"presumption of correctness" to the findings of state courts. This reversal of the burden of proof has now been itself reversed, or at least in part.

The AEDPA was passed by Congress in the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing, when Democrats sought to grant law enforcement agencies
greater leeway to circumvent constitutional or due process protection in the name of fighting terrorism. This goal dovetailed with the
Republican's effort to make state court convictions in capital cases "effective." The result was the AEDPA, two laws combined, both reactionary.

The "effective death penalty" portion of the Act was incorporated to essentially eliminate the right to appeal to higher courts. This was because prior to the AEDPA some 40 percent of state court convictions in capital cases were reversed on appeal to the federal courts, largely, according to studies on the subject, because of police misconduct, racism, intimidation of witnesses, falsification of evidence and ineffective assistance of counsel.

In essence, the AEDPA junked the presumptions of reasonable doubt and innocence and essentially required defendants to virtually prove their
innocence rather than simply presenting evidence of reasonable doubt in order to qualify for the right to appeal.

Judge Yohn gave Mumia a certificate of appealability with regard to just one of the 29 points argued in his habeas brief -- the Batson issue, or the application of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the case of Batson v. Kentucky that banned preemptive exclusions of Blacks from juries without stating a specific non-race-based reason for each exclusion.

Judge Yohn did not agree with and in fact rejected the defense's arguments with regard to Mumia's Batson claim. But he did grant Mumia
the right to appeal his view. Citing the AEDPA, he denied this right with regard to the remaining 27 claims presented in Mumia's habeas corpus, or appeal brief.

Since Yohn decided Mumia's case, however, the U.S. Supreme Court has at least in part overturned the near-insurmountable "presumption of correctness" standard established by the AEDPA. The court essentially substituted something more akin to the previous standard. This important modification of the AEDPA was a product of the court's decision in the case of Miller El v. Cockrell, decided in 2003.

While the Third Circuit's rationale for its reversal of Yohn and the resulting granting of the two new certificates of appealability have yet to be published, it is likely that the court relied on Miller El. Mumia's appeal to the Third Circuit, authored by Robert R. Bryan, indeed cited Miller El several times.

The Third Circuit's decision was not entirely positive. It denied Mumia certificates of appealability with regard to four other important points raised by the defense, including the right to self-representation, the exclusion of Mumia from a majority of the
court proceedings in his own trial and the racist exclusion of an already selected Black juror from the jury panel.

The Third Circuit also allowed the State of Pennsylvania to challenge a Federal District Court decision that had previously ordered the
State to hold a new sentencing hearing based on the constitutionally flawed jury instructions issued by Judge Sabo. Sabo improperly told the jurors, during the sentencing phase of Mumia's 1982 trial, that if
they were to decide to find mitigating circumstances sufficient to impose a life sentence rather than execution, they would have to be unanimous.

The Federal District Court ruled that unanimity had never been required. It ordered the State of Pennsylvania to hold a new sentencing hearing, in effect a new trial, within 180 days and with the proper jury instructions.

If the state failed to do so Yohn asserted that he would impose a life sentence on Mumia in place of the jury's execution verdict.

The Dec. 6 Third Circuit granted the State of Pennsylvania a certificate of appealability on this matter, an ominous ruling to say
the least.

While legal analysts doubt that Pennsylvania prosecutors will be successful in pursuing this "victory" for reaction, if they are, and if Mumia loses on the remaining three issues where he was granted
review, he will once again be subject to an order for his execution by lethal injection. But Robert R. Bryan, backed by several precedents on this point, seriously doubts that Pennsylvania prosecutors can succeed
in their effort to uphold Judge Sabo's flawed jury instructions.

Assuming Bryan is correct and the State of
Pennsylvania fails in this matter, the result must be either a decision by state prosecutors to
drop the matter of Mumia's execution entirely and abide by Yohn's decision to change the verdict from execution to life imprisonment, or, in the alternative, the state can impanel an entirely new jury and
retry the entire case. In this eventuality, however, the jury's verdict would be restricted to two options only, execution or life imprisonment. A verdict of innocence would be excluded from consideration.

Even here, however, the defense's ability to bring in evidence of innocence during a potential second trial might well result, according to Bryan, in new proceedings that could lead to Mumia's freedom.

From the realm of speculation in regard to the State of Pennsylvania's slim chance of prevailing in their effort to uphold Judge Sabo's flawed instructions to the jury, we now proceed to consideration of more probably outcomes. Bryan asserts with confidence that "The Third Circuit decision opens the door to a new trial and freedom for my client."

The case is now on the legal fast track. The next several months will see defense and prosecution attorneys meeting stringent deadlines for
a series of briefs and counter briefs. The first deadline, January 17, has been imposed on the State of Pennsylvania to present its opening brief.

Barring the granting of extensions, thirty days later the opening brief for the defense is to follow. These will be followed by a series of rebuttals. The 10-person court will then issue a decision or first set a date for a hearing and oral arguments.

In addition to the possible outcomes discussed above the Third Circuit could either order a new trial on all issues or send the case back to the Federal District Court to re-hear the issues where it had
previously ruled without regard to Mumia's
constitutional rights.

Close observers, including former Pennsylvania state prosecutors believe that a new trial for Mumia, where for the first time in 24 years he would be allowed to present the full range of evidence proving his innocence, could only result in his acquittal and freedom.

While Mumia has won a critical victory on this road, Pennsylvania officials are far from conceding any error. They remain focused on securing a third order for Mumia's execution. Mumia's freedom will be
a product of both his legal efforts and a mass political movement exerting its will and making the price of his execution and continued incarceration to high to pay.

Friend of the court or amicus curiae briefs are in preparation for Mumia by the NAACP's Legal Defense Fund on the Batson/jury selection issue and by the National Lawyers Guild on the issue of the
constitutionally-flawed trial summation by state prosecutor, Joseph McGill.

In Philadelphia contact: International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal at 215-476-8812. In San Francisco contact: The
Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu-Jamal at 415-255
1080.