Friday, July 6, 2001	Go to: S M T W T F S
E-mail the story | Plain-text for printing

New lawyers seek fresh start on appeal for Abu-Jamal

The team accuses previous attorneys of having had a conflict of interest. A death sentence is at stake.

By Joseph A. Slobodzian
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

Convicted police killer Mumia Abu-Jamal's new lawyers have asked a federal judge to suspend the appeal of his conviction and death sentence so they can mount a new legal challenge in the Pennsylvania courts.

The petitions filed by Pittsburgh lawyer Marlene Kamish in U.S. District Court and Philadelphia Common Pleas Court signaled a change in direction for Abu-Jamal's defense and his new legal team's decision to make the old team's conduct a key issue in that defense.

Kamish's petition said that she and her cocounsel "have uncovered an all-pervasive conflict of interest" by Abu-Jamal's former lawyers, Leonard Weinglass and Daniel R. Williams, that "infected their representation of [him] and perverted the adversarial process to [his] detriment."

The petitions, if granted, would also have the practical effect of adding years to Abu-Jamal's appeal - and his life.

Abu-Jamal, 46, convicted in the 1981 shooting of Officer Daniel Faulkner, is in solitary confinement on death row in a state prison near Pittsburgh.

Cathie Abookire, a spokeswoman for District Attorney Lynne M. Abraham, said prosecutors had not seen Abu-Jamal's latest filing and could not comment.

Since Kamish and her cocounsel took over the case April 30, the District Attorney's Office has opposed extending them additional time or letting them amend the appeals petition filed 21 months ago.

Williams yesterday called Kamish's allegations about him and Weinglass "too absurd to even merit a response."

"Len Weinglass and I fought very hard for Mumia, and if his new counsel can show that we missed something worthwhile, more power to them," he said. "I just hope they have Mumia's best interests at heart."

In April, 18 months after Abu-Jamal began his third and final series of appeals of his conviction in the Faulkner murder, the former radio reporter and black activist suddenly fired Weinglass and Williams, who had handled his appeals for almost 10 years.

Abu-Jamal contended the two had violated the lawyer-client relationship when Williams wrote an insider's account of the case, Executing Justice, published in May.

Since then, Kamish and cocounsel Eliot Lee Grossman have contended that conflicts of interest kept Weinglass and Williams from making use of a "confession" to Faulkner's murder by self-described "hit man" Arnold R. Beverly.

Beverly claimed to have been hired by unidentified crime figures and corrupt police officers to kill Faulkner because Faulkner was interfering with prostitution, gambling and drug-dealing in the neighborhood around 13th and Locust Streets.

In his book, Williams said that he and Weinglass knew about Beverly's purported confession and the "mob hit" theory but dismissed it as not credible.

Abu-Jamal was convicted of shooting Faulkner, 25, during the early-morning hours of Dec. 9, 1981, after the decorated five-year officer pulled over Abu-Jamal's brother, William Cook, in a traffic stop at 13th and Locust Streets.

Abu-Jamal, driving a taxi, reportedly passed by, spotted Faulkner and his brother, and parked the cab.

Prosecutors said that police responding to a report of a shooting discovered the mortally wounded Faulkner on the ground and Abu-Jamal, wounded by a bullet from Faulkner's gun, slumped on a curb nearby. Abu-Jamal's gun, with five spent shells, was also found.

Abu-Jamal has contended he is innocent and was framed by police for his radical activities. His first appeals team argued that his defense at trial was undermined by an incompetent attorney and the judge's refusal to authorize more money to hire pathology and ballistics experts who might have proved Abu-Jamal was not the shooter.