I finished reading the book by Tammy Bruce, who raised several other issues (some of which I agreed with, others I didn’t) that I wanted to talk about. After finishing the book, I started reading The Ten Things You Can’t Say in America, by Larry Elder.

So far, I’ve only finished the first chapter, “Blacks are more racist than whites“, and I’ve started on the second. Just typing the name of that first chapter made me feel more than a bit uneasy. That’s actually something I think may be touched on in the second chapter, but I’ve not gotten through it, and it’s not what I wanted to write about anyway.

At least one of these books (possibly both, but I can’t find a reference in the Elder book now) have mentioned a name that I was once relatively familiar with that had fallen “off the radar,” so to speak. Mumia Abu-Jamal.

You’ve probably heard Abu-Jamal (born Wesley Cook), who was convicted of killing police officer Daniel Faulkner. Abu-Jamal’s supporters are numerous (though, not as numerous as the many websites I’ve found supporting him would have you believe) — these are people who believe that Abu-Jamal is innocent, the victim of a massive conspiracy by the legal system.

In case you’re not familiar with the case, here are two websites. The first, FreeMumia.org, is pretty standard fare for what I found around the web on this topic. The second, Justice for Police Officer Daniel Faulkner, is the first site I found that supported the conviction (that’s not to say it’s the only one — I got tired of looking, though).

I’ve read more than a bit about this case, and, honestly, Abu-Jamal’s supporters come across as being almost as rational as those who think that AIDS is actually a man-made bioweapon designed to kill the black race. Do I think it’s possible that the man’s innocent, and that his being found guilty is related to his race? Sure, it’s possible. Do I think that his being found guilty was because of a massive conspiracy, that everyone involved in his conviction (the judge, the prosecuting attorney, and the police) knew he was innocent, and conspired to convict him anyway? Not for a second.

The first thing that turns me against any idea of a big conspiracy isn’t really evidence, but it’s always convincing. Occam’s Razor, which says (when boiled down) that the simplest sufficient explanation is usually the most logical. The second thing is that conspiracies, while they work well in movies and television, don’t work all that well in practice. Human beings are social animals. We like to talk. The more people involved, the more likely it is that there will be leaks, and I’ve seen no evidence supporting that. Finally, let’s assume that all these people do know that Abu-Jamal is innocent. Not one of them is concerned about the fact that the real murderer is still out there? They’re more concerned with getting Abu-Jamal than with getting a cop-killer? I don’t buy it.

I’ll admit fairly readily that our legal system isn’t perfect, and that I don’t know whether Abu-Jamal is guilty or not. Why don’t I know? Because I don’t know the facts. All I have are the writings of political pundits and internet sites, and while that may be sufficient for some people, it’s not sufficient for me. When the facts are known and undisputed, I’m willing to stand up and say that I think a court decision is wrong. If the facts are questionable, and I have no real means of seeking out the truth (other than relying upon reports from other people), I have to trust in the justice system. Our system, while not perfect, is designed with a number of redundancies to help weed out the wrongful convictions, both due to maliciousness and mistakes. I know it’s never going to be perfect, but I have faith that it’s very good.

I simply don’t believe that I, or any of the actors, singers, or ubiquitous internet supporters of Mumia Abu-Jamal, are in a better place to judge than the twelve jurors who were presented with the facts during the original trial.

(Incidentally, just before I completed writing this, I stumbled across this 1998 article (updated in 2001) that supports the idea that Abu-Jamal is guilty, so I guess that the Faulkner site above isn’t the only one.)
——–