The federal panel’s majority employed a legal procedure to sidestep Sabo’s clear and illegal bias – an Achilles Heel of that federal ruling and this entire case.
It is incredible to contend that the widely condemned Judge Sabo who presided during most trial court proceedings in the Abu-Jamal’s case did not violate any of Abu-Jamal’s rights at any time – despite his history of violating rights in this case and other cases.
Judge Sabo handled 32 murder trials that ended in death sentences before his retirement. But 24 of those sentences in Sabo’s courtroom had been vacated for errors as of June 2007 according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Some of those death sentences were reverse due to misconduct and/or mistakes by Sabo.
Sabo had once ordered prosecutors to pursue a death penalty when the death penalty had been ruled illegal in Pennsylvania. Sabo’s ordering that illegal procedure led to overturning that death sentence.
WHAT NEXT?
This March 2008 Third Circuit ruling leaves Abu-Jamal with few legal options to challenge his conviction.
Abu-Jamal can appeal the panel’s ruling to the entire Third Circuit Court hoping for that full Court to overturn the panel’s ruling. Further, he can appeal any Third Circuit ruling to the US Supreme Court.
There is a slight prospect of new action in Pa state courts.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
