Michael Smerconish

How long will Mumia charade go on?

Michael Smerconish

Related Links The Mumia morass becomes more muddied Why not just let him rot in prison for life? Neither side happy with judge's ruling

By Michael Smerconish
DANNY FAULKNER'S victimization continues. Mumia took his breath away, and now the justice system won't let go of his soul.

We're 20 years and counting and the charade that enables Mumia to walk the face of this earth seems destined to last a few years more.

What a disgrace.

To the extent there is good news, it is this. Judge Yohn, like every other judge who has looked at this case over the span of two decades, did not see fit to overturn the jury's fundamental findings of fact.

He saw no reason to buy into the lies and misrepresentations that have characterized the Mumia defense. That is significant and ought not to be overlooked.

It's a repudiation of the defense claims that the ballistics didn't match.

It's a denial of the defense arguments that the multiple eyewitnesses are all to be disbelieved.

It's a rebuff of the defense claim that a former hit man was the real murderer, and it is a rejection of every other ridiculous notion advanced to keep a cop killer alive.

On the downside, it means that Maureen, Danny's widow, and Pat, Larry, Tommy and Kenny - Danny's brothers - might now have to endure yet another sentencing hearing unless the appellate courts undo what was done yesterday.

What's the basis, you ask?

After 20 years, and on the strength of a claim that has been unanimously rejected by the State Supreme Court - a lone federal judge has accepted an argument based on technicality, which alleges that sentencing instructions to the jury were unclear.

In the process, Yohn denied justice to the Faulkners just nine days after the two-decade anniversary for the murder, and one week shy of Christmas.

The legal basis for the opinion has to do with the jury's findings of so-called aggravating and mitigating circumstances.

Aggravating circumstances are serious issues - mitigating are less so.

In 1982, the jury found one aggravating circumstance - the murder of a cop in the line of duty, and one mitigating circumstance - the fact that Mumia had no rap sheet before he murdered Danny.

To find an aggravating circumstance - the serious stuff - the law requires unanimity.

A finding of mitigating circumstances does not need to be unanimous.

Judge Yohn thinks the jury might not have understood the difference in the unanimity requirements.

Joe McGill prosecuted Mumia at the 1982 trial. His gut reaction: "The jury knew exactly what they did in not finding any additional mitigating circumstances based on the full record of the prosecution and the defense and particularly following Mumia's continuous conduct."

Nevertheless, the Faulkner family may now have to sit through a sentencing hearing all over again.

All this over a simple hearing? No way. The jury is long gone, and so we need to get a new jury and educate them about the case, even though the underlying conviction will stand.

That means another grisly presentation of the case in full view of Danny's friends and family.

Nine days ago, I took two of my children - two brothers - to the dedication of a plaque at 1234 Locust St. that pays tribute to Danny's service.

My boys saw the Faulkner brothers grieving, and wanted to know why, after 20 years, they are still crying.

I am running out of rational answers.

Michael Smerconish's column appears regularly every Thursday. His e-mail address is mas@mastalk.com.

Back to Top