Talk:Mumia Abu-Jamal/Archive 1

message: Acording to forensic evidence at the trial both Abu Jamal and Faulkner were shot with .45 calibre bullets. But the prosecution claimed the murder weapon was Abu Jamal's .38 calibre gun. (Faulkner also carried a .38).
"Forensic evidence at the trial".  This was based off one of the forensic scientists notes next to the bullet.  It was his best offhand guess at the caliber of the bullet.  
----
I think there's some information worth looking at on the Amnesty International site.  But I am a dyed in the wool commie pinko crazy longhair.  ;-)  --KQ
----
This is a perfect example of an article that (1) people will love to fight about, (2) people will want to be biased, but (3) we can make unbiased.  The article as it stands is clearly biased in favor of the view that Mumia is innocent (or guilt is unproven).  For shame. --Larry_Sanger
: One way to do this would be to demand things be cited. It drives me crazy to read bizarre allegations, like "somebody heard the judge say the n word" with 1) no name 2) no citation and 3) the original allegation itself is hearsay. This technique can be abused. Forcing at least a reference for where it came from would limit duplicity. 
-----
Well, it is worth noting that Amnesty International doesn't attempt to claim he's innocent; they just state that they do not believe in the death penalty.  They also refuse to call him a political prisoner.  Koyaanis Qatsi
----
I tried to make this NPOV and bent over backwards to change as little as possible.  The article is still biased in his favor but now is a better encyclopedia article and less biased. 
Things I changed.  The description of the 2001 appeal did not mention the affirmation of the conviction, only the point about sending back for reconsideration (not overturning) the death sentence, for instance.  I also added the facts of the case, 4 am, pistol registered to Abu Jamal by his side, brother being arrested, which were also not mentioned.  I believe none of these facts is disputed. I also added one pro conviction web site, apparently the only one there is, but quite complete. Ortolan88 18:58 Aug 13, 2002 (PDT)
:Worse than that, I don't think it does a good job of characterizing anyone's arguments.  All the Free Mumia stuff seems to come out of that one linked article, nearly verbatim. DanKeshet
That's what comes of editing while bending over backwards.  The article is much better now, improved by all three of us.  Ortolan88
----
Yeah, I definitely think it's getting better.  But jeez, there may be only one or two Daniel Faulkner memorial sites out there, but they're web design is far superior to all the Free Mumia sites put together.  All the information on the case and on the man is buried deep beneath slogans. Can anybody find the man's birthdate?  That seems like the most basic information to have in an encyclopaedia article. DanKeshet
----
As a bystander dropping by, I thought this was a pretty balanced introduction to the topic.
----
Looks NPOV at this point, and I think he's guilty, or at least he did something within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's definition of murder (I also think he was railroaded). I do wonder if "one of the few" in that first external link makes the Establishment look a little more beleaguered than they actually are --Charles A. L. 01:18, Nov 13, 2003 (UTC)
----
Hi, some points that occurred to me, which I will work on as I can unless someone beats me to it:
* Association of Black Journalists or Black Journalists Association?
* The whole paragraph about the "facts of the case" is unattributed. Did this all come from the trial transcript? Did either side dispute any of it during the trial, or does either side do so now? In particular, the text about an "ensuing struggle" does not strike me as very NPOV. I think we should at least throw in an "alleged" or two.
* Was Faulkner shot between midnight and 4 am of December 9, or was he shot before midnight and Abu-Jamal arrested the next morning? Pistol "at his side" - in his possession, or was he unconscious, or what?
* Was Jackson disbarred? When, under what circumstances, for what reason?
* Witness statement item has no counterclaim; do Abu-Jamal's detractors offer one?
* One item says the prosecution gave "specific, relevant reasons" for each challenge. Reasons need not be given for peremptory challenges (hence the name). Were they peremptory or not?
* "Faulkner was shot with a .38" item refers, three times, to "the bullet". How many times and where was Faulkner shot, and how many bullets were found in his body? This article implies he was shot at least twice; the Faulkner article says 5 times.
* How many times and where was Abu-Jamal shot? Were bullets found in him, and if so, did they match Faulkner's gun?
* What happened to William Cook while all this shooting was allegedly going on?
* More details and/or examples of the non-conflicts and non-holes would be good to have; the item is rather sparse as it stands.
* Federal judge ordered in 2001: what was the judge's name? What was the result? It was nearly two years ago, something must have happened by now.
* I seem to recall reading somewhere that Abu-Jamal never denied having committed the murder. Any hard data on this?
Tualha 01:41, Nov 13, 2003 (UTC)
I do not know what the article looked like when you read it and found that it was biased in favor of Jamal. As I read it now it is exactly what I would expect from people who write that there are "only one or two Daniel Faulkner memorial sites out there", "but they're (sic!) web design is far superior to all the Free Mumia sites put together". Interesting that you still managed to provide more links propagating the case against Jamal and even took the amnesty page out. I especially disliked the ending, so I changed it. I still think that it is pathetic to bring up the pro-Jamal arguments first only to refute them one by one afterwards. I added some more, maybe you can try and counter them as well. Does it make sense to give every idiot the right to change encyclopedia entries? Where do you usually get your information, at "free" republic.com?
SONG PARODY: Crying (frying Abu-Jamal)
freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/147714/posts
What should happen to Mumia Abu-Jamal? ('Fry Mumia,' Freep this Poll)
freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/593435/posts
Mar 4, 2004
:"I do not know what the article looked like when you read it and found that it was biased in favor of Jamal." Excuse me? Were you replying to my comments, anonymous one? I did not say I found it biased in favor of Jamal. Tualha 01:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: N P O V !! The article may have been unbiased 2 1/2 years ago, but it sure isn't anymore.  The evidence introduced at the trial should be located in the trial section.  Any information not introduced at the trial doesn't belong there.  Two paragraphs in the "trial" section about William Singletary is absurd, since he never testified at the trial.  The obvious non-neutrality show by starting "Another witness...".  Why "another", since he had nothing to do with the trial.  And in two paragraphs about Singletary, it's not mentioned how incoherent his claims were.  Abu Jamal's own attorney said "We believe his recollection was not entirely accurate."  At best, Singletary belongs in a "controversy" section, to conform with the neutrality principles of Wikipedia. Tom NM 13:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Old discussion) 

message: Who is this "third group of activists" that "object to seeing him punished for killing a police officer"?  Sounds made-up to me.  Taco Deposit 02:03, May 15, 2004 (UTC)
Surely this is a reference to groups that object to special laws regarding the killing of police officers, making the punishment more stringent than for the same offence against someone else.  Having said that, as far as I know Pa. also has a death penalty for the first degreee murder of private citizens, and I don't know of any punishment more stringent than that.
My reading of the transcript was that Mumia wanted John Africa as his defense counsel, not as a witness. Can anyone refute this? Excellent NPOV writing, I'm sure it wasn't easy.
----
Points re the current version:
* What is the source for the stenographer's claim? Who is she?
* The paragraph beginning "Conflicting testimony and missing witnesses" sounds like a quote from an Amnesty International report, because of this part: "However, neither of these statements have been seen by Amnesty International". Is it? It should be quoted and attributed, if so.
* Many of the questions I raised last November still have not been addressed.
Tualha 01:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Object to seeing him punished for killing a police officer"? 

message: "Abu-Jamal was arrested at 4 a.m. with a pistol registered in his name at his side."
What's the source for this? The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania doens't have firearm registration. -- Spock
:It shows up on sites supporting Abu-Jamal. Perhaps a concealed weapon permit. Rmhermen 15:47, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
: what is meant by the quoted statement anyway? I read it and was confused as to whether the (persumably legally owned firearm) was simply in his house/nearby when arrested or whether he actually had it on his person when arrested. Also, is it claimed (or proven) that this gun was the one which shot the police officer? some clarification in the article might be desirable.
There was no question that a Charter Arms .38 had been lawfully purchased by Mumia about 2 years before Faulkner wasw murdered and that it was the same gun he was carrying that night in a shoulder holster. Coastda Sept. 3, 2006
----
What about Anthony Jackson? The 'Objections to Jamal's trial' section and the 'Support for Jamal's trial section have information that is completely opposite. 
*"Sabo appointed lawyer Anthony Jackson, who had never defended a client in a murder case, to defend Jamal."
*"Abu-Jamal's lawyer (Anthony Jackson) was in fact highly experienced, having served in twenty murder cases..."
Shouldn't it be possible to resolve this? Shouldn't there be reliable background information about Anthony Jackson somewhere? Apol0gies 17:33, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Registered firearm? 

message: I chopped up the long lists of objections and points in support. OK, it's a big change on a debated page, but I think it makes things easier to read. I have hardly touched the actual text of the points made, I just moved them around.
The titles would probably need changing, I'm not that happy with them. Ideally, everything should be melted down in something not as pro- and con-. Adding more granularity would be good, but that would require actually reworking the points.
Hmm, I'll go back and do exactly that :) Flammifer 15:46, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chopped things up and reorganized 

message: I'm unsure of the status of Mumia's Peabody Award: as far as I have known, it is not just an urban legend, though the article says that it is a common misconception that he won one; is this true? I googled Mumia +"Peabody Award" and got several hits, including many that seem rather definitive.  For this reason, I took out the (seemingly POV) sentence about this being untrue, and added as much info about the peabody he allegedly won (1980, for covering the Pope's visit). Any further elucidation would be appreciated. jglc | t | c 14:45, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A search in the peabody awards archives ( - hmm, should we have a list on wikipedia ?) doesn't find him. Since I find some claims on the net that "some claim he won a peabody, but it's crap", and no claims of "some say he didn't win a peabody, but he did", I'll assume that most such claims are just people repeating what they heard without checking things up (or, in some cases, probably expecting the readers to believe them). I'll say in the article he didn't receive one. Flammifer 14:55, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Peabody Award

message: I'm trying to break up the format of lotsa bullet-point statements starting with "Jamal's supporters claim" and "Jamal's opponents say", etc. I don't think it makes the article very readable; plus we shouldn't just put  "opponents say" in front of every statement that's harmful to Mumia's case, and "supporters say" in front of every one that supports it. It should be possible to have something as factual as possible.
I think that http://www.danielfaulkner.com/ contains a lot of information and as far as aI can tell it's the most complete resource on the trial, and has many references to the transcripts, though it's not exactly NPOV.
Maybe we should integrate direct links to the trial transcripts ? Flammifer 11:55, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bullet points, "supporters say", "opponents say" 

message: Nowhere in the article does it actually summarize what happened at the murder of daniel faulkner.  IT reports the witness statements, and plenty about the trial, but there's no summary of the crime itself.  Could someone write one up, identifying which facts are in dispute along the way?  Night Gyr 03:10, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  needs a summary 

message: Seeing as how Abu-Jamal's death sentence was commuted to life in prison, this should probably be removed until the situation changes (if indeed it does change). --204.152.176.70 15:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Prisoners sentenced to death 

message: Please stop inserting pro-Mumia PoVs into this section of the article. It's only going to be reverted.  --usmcginn 06:21, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Points PoV

message: I agree it needs to begin with a summary of the crime. When I read that Mumia was "nearly comatose" I didn't know why until I read further down that he had been shot as well.69.107.138.62 03:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  re: summary 

message: I have just completed a major re-write of this article.  What I have mostly done is reorganize the existing material so that it is more readable and flows in a logical order.  There remains, however, a great deal to do:
* Very few of the "facts" given in the article are cited.  I have no doubt that many of them can be linked to one or more of the sources listed at the end of the article, but I have no idea where to even begin looking.
* There is almost nothing in the article about Abu-Jamal, other than the murder case and its sequelae.  It seems to me that a biographical article ought to have at least some information about other aspects of the subject's life.  I have tried googling for this, but come up pretty much empty.  I'm talking about basic information:  Where was he born?  Where was he educated?  What happened in his life prior to the murder trial?  I see some hints in the article that he may have been associated with MOVE and/or the Black Panther Party, but again, there's no real development of this information, nor are there any cites.
* When I did my googling, I was appalled at the apparent complete lack of any remotely unbiased sources of information concerning Abu-Jamal.  Everyone who has anything on the web seems to have gravitated to one extreme or the other.  Are there no neutral sources on this topic at all??? Brandon39 07:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major re-write 

message: First, Brandon, let me say that you did a lot of good work and the article is certainly much better.  However, it still has some problems, most of which you mention yourself.   It goes without saying that the article is quite lightly sourced; the first link shows up in Section 4.  Also, this article is completely overwhelmed with the controversy surrounding Abu-Jamal and his trial, and says nothing about him.
So I propose the following:  We create another article (or maybe several) containing most of the information here.  For example, one could imagine having an article entitled Criticism and support of the Abu-Jamal conviction, or perhaps Controversies surrounding the Abu-Jamal conviction containing the content of Sections 2.2, 2.3, 3, 4, 5, and maybe 7 and 8.   Then this article would be shorter and only contain uncontroversial, factual evidence of MAJ's life etc.  The other article could concentrate on the controversies.
Either way, one needs to add about 300  tags to this article.
I was going to do this now, but I realize that it's such a major edit that I should run it by the talk page.  Does anyone have any comments or suggestions concerning such a move? --Deville (Talk) 17:03, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say go for it!  I thought about the need for the  tags, but it just seemed like more fun than I was willing to allow myself.  I think your notion of splitting the article is an excellent one.  Have at it!  Brandon39 19:48, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Deville (Talk) 01:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major change proposal

message: There are a lot [citation needed] statements in this section.  It sounds like these are transcript quotes and it would be nice for them to say as much, or even have a link to a page with it.  I think its kind of important so I've put a tag on the article to say as much. 69.249.209.253 06:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  citation for the section "Court proceedings and controversies surrounding the 1982 trial" 

message: I thought all the stuff at the bottom that was removed in the last edit was relevant, so I put it back.
I think just saying Mumia has become a controversial issue does not mean much without supporting it. Mentioning which artists and organizations have come out in Mumia's defense helps give the assertion that his sentence is very widely protested some ground.
--66.61.63.109 01:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  About artist support 

message: I took the liberty of reverting the additions by the IP address.  They read as extremely POV and out of place, and moreover are a very close copy of this web page, so it is not surprising that they are POV.  --Deville (Talk) 01:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On removing big addition by 12.205.44.59  

message: I believe the picture "Free Mumia" is biased towards his defense and should not be posted.
--Acp 1987 03:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, this is better that you're discussing on the Talk page.  However, one should look at this picture closely, and note that although the original painter (stenciler, whatever) wrote "Free Mumia", someone came along later and wrote "Cop Killer" on top of it.  Actually, this is probably as fair an assessment of the current debate as one could wish for!  I'm certainly open to debating whether this picture should be in or out, but I don't see it as biased because of that.  Let's leave it in until we have discussed further, and perhaps other editors would like to comment. --Deville (Talk) 11:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture Removal 

message: Please! This has already been said before; but a subpage Trial of Mumia Abu-Jamal has already been created, and the discussion of the trial moved there! Edits and discussion should be over there!
See Wikipedia:Summary style.
If you don't like what the summary says, then work on the trial page, and then update the summary! Don't just add stuff to the summary! Steven argue, please; respect the work that has already been done, don't make a POV fork! flammifertalk 22:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  There ALREADY is a sub-page! 

message: Is there some reason why we have gone from a link to the complete trial transcript to a link for just the first day?  Perhaps that belongs on the trial sub-page, but no matter where it is, the entire transcript is better than just a selected portion of it.  Picking and choosing what part of the transcript to show is a POV issue.  All of it or none of it, not just the part that supports one POV.
Arturner 18:30, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transcript link

message: I think someone should put some information about Immortal Technique mentioning and cooperating with Mumia Abu-Jamal in his music. 83.249.193.109 22:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music 

message: Nowhere in the article is there any mention of why he changed his name. His name looks Arabic, so perhaps he changed his name because he converted to Islam. When did that happen--in prison? Before the murder? These are a couple of details that would be appropriate to include somewhere in the article. Could someone who knows add this information, please? Godfrey Daniel 16:02, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Name? Religion?

message: This article has all sorts of problems. It attests that Jamal was sentenced to death in 1982, and his publications while on death row are mentioned, yet it never unequivocally states whether or not he was executed, how he was executed, when he was executed. After the death penalty statement, the article goes on saying Jamal "has" done this, "has" done that. The first few words of the article, in fact, assert we was born in 1954, but never make mention of his death, if it did indeed occur. Two people who read this article could come up with two equally justified (based on the article, that is) conclusions: Abu Jamal was executed based on the proceedings of a legal system pitted against him, or that he managed to escape the death penalty. This urgently needs to be fixed. At the very least, someone who knows can reply with the relevant facts, and I can put it into the article. Matthew 13:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is He Or Isn't He Alive???