Free Mumia! Who is that, by the way?

Many of you will remember the omnipresent 'Free Mumia!' campaign that gripped the country several years ago, particularly in Philadelphia. You may be interested to know that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit just affirmed the partial grant (and partial denial) of habeas relief. Presumably Mumia will file a fourth petition for certiorari, which presumably will also be denied. And presumably Mumia will get his new sentencing hearing. And presumably he will file various appeals and petitions about the new sentence.

I find this entire episode fascinating. As you may recall, the 'Free Mumia!' campaign is based on the idea that his conviction was the product of racism. That and opposition to the death penalty. What you may not know, and what I suspect many 'Free Mumia!' adherents may not know, is that the state's case against him was pretty strong. Four eyewitnesses, including three who specifically identified Mumia, testified about how he ran across the street at police officer Daniel Faulkner (who was apprehending Mumia's brother) and shot him in the back. He then fired several more times point-blank at Faulkner, including into his face. Faulkner managed to wound him. Police found Mumia at the scene with a revolver next to him. The bullet that wounded Mumia was matched to Faulkner's gun. Mumia also admitted to the killing after his arrest while in the hospital emergency room.

If you listen to the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world, however, Mumia is the second coming of Martin Luther King, Jr. I've always wondered, why make such a fuss defending this guy? There are plenty of instances of discrimination against African-Americans who are NOT murderers and cop killers. There are plenty of death row inmates who were convicted on much less evidence. Why him? The guy is an international hero, apparently. That's just ridiculous. This is an example of what I think is a big problem with the African-American leadership in this country, at least pre-Obama. Too many prominent leaders and activists are indiscriminant about discrimination--they treat every case as if it were a KKK lynching regardless of the facts, lionizing these defendants for the sole reason that they are black. This hurts the African-American community by undermining their credibility and treating too many thugs and criminals as role models. The victims of crime in America are disproportionally African-American, so why defend criminals? I have to think that Dr. King, were he alive today, would repudiate Mumia's crimes. He fought for justice and for the vast majority of African-Americans who are dignified and law-abiding, not for murderers.

Another interesting aspect of this case is the illustration of how the death penalty really works. A popular criticism of the death penalty is that it is more "expensive" than incarceration. This is sort of an urban myth though. Obviously the act of execution is not more expensive than housing an inmate for the rest of his/her life. The expenses that statistic is reflecting are the costs of the dozens of appeals and habeas petitions that the law affords death row inmates. Even after having been sentenced to death in 1982, Mumia has put off his execution for over 25 years (and counting) through numerous appeals that have generally been totally unsuccessful. In other words, in many cases, a death row inmate is essentially the same thing as a life-in-prison inmate but with greater access to relief from courts. There are of course very powerful arguments against the death penalty, but "higher cost" is not one of them.