OFFICER FAULKNER'S WIDOW ATTACKED

Maureen Faulkner, Officer Daniel Faulkner's widow, has spent years attempting to publicly counter the misinformation disseminated by Jamal's attorneys and supporters. Mrs. Faulkner's actions are helping individuals interested in her husband's case to see through the misrepresentations, distortions and lies produced and disseminated by Leonard Weinglass, Mr. Jamal's current attorney. To counter her efforts, Mr. Weinglass and groups supporting Mr. Jamal launched a smear campaign, which was intended to cast doubt on Mrs. Faulkner's credibility.

Mr. Weinglass and his friends have seized upon a statement made by Mrs. Faulkner in a 1995 newspaper interview, and tried to use it to discredit her. At that time, Mrs. Faulkner commented to a reporter from the Washington Post, that Mumia Abu-Jamal had turned and smirked at her when her husband's blood-stained shirt was displayed in open court during the 1982 trial. Several groups supporting Mr. Jamal have published articles arguing that Mrs. Faulkner's statement is a lie. To support their point, they look to Mr. Weinglass to supply them with facts from the court record.

We asked Mrs. Faulkner about her 1995 statement. She told us that she stands by it, because it is true. Her position creates an interesting situation: either Mrs. Faulkner or Mr. Weinglass is lying. As with all pronouncements made by Leonard Weinglass, which he purports to back up with "fact", we felt it important to review his allegation in the trial record. We were not surprised by what we found.

THE BACKGROUND REGARDING THIS SITUATION

When printing propaganda attacking Mrs. Faulkner, the various groups supporting Mr. Jamal have used information supplied by Mr. Weinglass to support their position. Based on this information, they state that Officer Faulkner's shirt was displayed in the courtroom on June 26, 1982 and that it was not displayed again in the courtroom on any other day. As usual, Weinglass supplies Jamal's supporters with an incomplete and twisted version of the real facts.

While researching this situation, we discovered that Mr. Weinglass had recently written a letter to the General Manager of the ABC-TV affiliate in San Francisco, chastising them for producing and airing a 12 minute Special Report about the support Mumia Abu-Jamal has received in the Bay Area. This letter has been reproduced in it's entirety on a web site managed by a group supporting Mr. Jamal called "Refuse and Resist." In his letter, Mr. Weinglass has placed in writing his accusation against Mrs. Faulkner.

In his letter to KGO-TV, Mr. Weinglass states, "It would have been helpful if KGO had asked Mrs. Faulkner about a claim she makes that when a ballistics expert held up her dead husband's bloody shirt in the courtroom to display the bullet holes, Jamal turned and smiled at her. This is a real crowd stopper. It seems to capture the very essence of the prosecution's claim that Jamal was a cold-blooded killer. The only problem is, it's not true. A simple examination of the transcript shows that on the day the ballistics expert presented his testimony, [June 26, 1982] Jamal was absent from the courtroom." Mr. Weinglass goes on to say, "In the court of law, the prosecution has had Judge Sabo to protect them. But in the court of public opinion, Mrs. Faulkner has no such protection. Her erroneous statements were quickly exposed."

THE REAL FACTS ABOUT THE BLOODY SHIRT

Mr. Weinglass is correct about one thing regarding this matter. "A quick review of the transcripts" does reveal that on one of the days that the blood stained shirt was displayed, [6-26-82] it appears that Jamal may have been absent from the courtroom. However, a more detailed review of the transcripts reveals that Mrs. Faulkner is telling the truth and that Weinglass again misrepresents the facts to suit his underhanded tactics. A detailed review of the court record reveals that Officer Faulkner's blood stained shirt was displayed in the courtroom on two different days.

As Mr. Weinglass states, the shirt was displayed on June 26, 1982. However, the court record clearly shows that the shirt had previously been displayed in open court on June 21, 1982. Leonard Weinglass, a man paid well to have an implicit knowledge of the court record, has either missed this important fact, or has deliberately chosen to disregard it in order to attack Officer Faulkner's widow.

To verify this situation, we offer the following testimony directly from the trial record. On June 21, 1982 Officer John Heftner, the courts evidence handler, is asked:

Joe McGill: "Would you look at C-27?"
Heftner: "Yes"
McGill: "Can you identify it?"
Heftner: "It's Officer Faulkner's shirt."
(6-21-82, T.R. 4.10)

This verifies that the shirt was displayed in the courtroom on June 21, 1982.

A few moments later, Officer Heftner is asked to display Mr. Jamal's gun. Prosecutor McGill asks:

This testimony verifies beyond any doubt, that Jamal was in the courtroom when the blood stained shirt of his victim was displayed.

A final bit of documentation further illuminates the truth on this matter. On June 22, 1982, the day after Officer Faulkner's shirt was displayed, The Philadelphia Inquirer published an article stating the following, "Earlier in the day [6-21-82] Maureen Faulkner, the officer's widow, left the courtroom crying after her husband's bloody shirt was admitted as evidence."

Mrs. Faulkner provided us with an original copy of this article. She stated that on June 21, 1982, she had to be escorted from the courtroom because she began to hyperventilate when Mumia Abu-Jamal turned and smiled at her after her husband's blood-stained shirt was displayed. She was taken to Jefferson Hospital, the same hospital her murdered husband had been taken to. She was treated and released the same day.

CONCLUSION REGARDING THE "BLOODY SHIRT"

Inside the courtroom, Mr. Weinglass must act as an attorney, bound by a loose code of conduct. Outside the courtroom however, he has again proven himself to be an adept propagandist, a public relations man of the highest order. Should anyone dare speak the truth about this case, they are dealt with in the same manner as Mrs. Faulkner. Threatening letters are sent, rife with self-serving misrepresentations of the case facts, and Jamal's supporters blitz the Internet with their new misinformation. With their personal attack on Officer Faulkner's widow, Mr. Weinglass and his cohorts have again shown us that there is no limit to the depths he will sink to paint Mumia Abu-Jamal as the victim in this case.