[NYTr] COINTELPRO and the Panthers: The FBI's War on Black Liberation

[All the News That Doesn't Fit]

Counterpunch -Oct 21, 2007
http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs10202007.html

The FBI's War on Black Liberation

COINTELPRO and the Panthers

By RON JACOBS

The history of relations between the Black liberation movement and law
enforcement has always been adversarial, at its best. At its worst, it
is a history of murder, beatings, lies and frame-ups. There are few
groups in this history that experienced the latter more than the Black
Panther Party. The history of FBI and police harassment and
intimidation of Panther members during the Party's heyday is well
documented. It includes the murders of several members, the constant
harassment and petty arrests of members by local police forces and the
framing of many of its leaders. Most of these frame-ups resulted in
long prison terms for the members accused and convicted falsely.

What may be surprising to many who know this history is that these
frame-ups continue today. It was under the FBI/Justice Department
program known as COINTELPRO that the first frame-ups took place and it
is that program's successors that have occurred under. Two false
convictions that received much of the publicity in the 1990s were those
of Geronimo Pratt and Dhoruba bin Wahad. Both of these men spent over
fifteen years in prison for crimes they did not commit, thanks to
frame-ups carried out under the auspices of the COINTELPRO program.

Two ongoing cases that appear to be frame-ups from this vantage point
are those of Mumia abu Jamal and the San Francisco 8. The former is a
case involving the murder of a Philadelphia police officer in 1981 and
the latter involves the murder of a San Francisco policeman in 1971. In
both situations, the prosecution's case is based on evidence that is
flimsy at best and just plain false at its worst. Neither prosecution
has proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt despite several chances.
In addition, the politics of the defendants has been used by the
prosecution in an attempt to prejudice the jury.

Mumia's case has always carried the stench of a frame-up. The
conflicting testimony of witnesses, the failure of witnesses to appear
and many other instances of questionable conduct by the prosecution and
law enforcement have conspired to create this perception. A recent book
by Michael Schiffmannn titled Race Against Death (currently available
only in German) adds even more documentary fuel to this perception. The
text, which does a good job placing Mumia's case into a historical
context of racism in the United States, provides a history of the case
itself and the movement that has grown in support of Mumia following
the 1995 signing of his death warrant by then Pennsylvania governor Tom
Ridge. The new material at the end of the book includes several
never-before-published photographs of the 1981 crime scene that were
also never produced in court. These photos raise more questions as to
Mumia's role in the events of that night the policeman was killed. The
litany of miscues and missing evidence already familiar to those who
have followed Mumia's case around the world is repeated here, with a
renewed emphasis. In addition to this evidence is the newly discovered
fact that a fifth bullet fired by police at the scene for comparative
purposes was "lost."

The photos in Schiffmann's text cast more doubt on the state's case by
proving that the prosecution's statements that Mumia stood over Officer
Faulkner and fired at him several times. The photos show no marks from
the bullets that were supposedly fired in this fashion. In fact, the
sidewalk was not damaged in any way. Schiffmann foes on to write: "it
is thus no question anymore whether the scenario presented by the
prosecution at Abu-Jamal's trial is true. It is clearly not, because it
is physically and ballistically impossible." (p. 205) The remainder of
the photos show a scenario that constantly contradicts the testimony of
officers and witnesses (apparently coerced) and the nature of the scene
they described in Mumia's original trial.

It is the continued refusal of the court to allow a new trial for Mumia
that would allow the new evidence to be introduced that has been
pointed to by Mumia's supporters as part of the proof that not only was
Mumia framed because of his politics and outspokenness as a member of
the media, but that the frame-up continues. Added to this refusal by
the court is the somewhat understandable desire of the slain officer's
family to have a perpetrator locked up, even that someone isn't really
the killer.

Other lesser known cases involving the US government and former Black
Panther members are those of Veronza Bowers, Jr. and Jamil Abdullah
Al-Amin (formerly H. Rap Brown). Bowers has been in prison for more
than thirty years despite the fact that he is a model prisoner and has
served his complete sentence under the law, been approved for parole
only to have it overturned by the Justice department and is still in
prison sixteen months after his sentence has expired.

Besides this travesty, the facts of Bowers' conviction are
questionable, to say the least. He was convicted of the murder of a
U.S. Park Ranger based on the word of two government informers. Both of
the informers received reduced sentences for other crimes in exchange
for their testimony. There were no eye-witnesses, nor was there any
other evidence to link him to the crime. Bowers' alibi testimony was
not credited by the jury and the testimony of two relatives of the
informants who insisted that they were lying was not allowed. The
informants had all charges against them in this case dropped. In
addition, according to the prosecutor's post-sentencing report, one was
given $10,000 by the government.

As for Al-Amin, he was recently removed from state custody in Georgia
by federal authorities and sent to the federal control unit in
Florence, Colorado. No reason was given for the transfer, despite
repeated requests from family and friends. According to the website
maintained by the family and friends of the prisoner Dr. Mutulu Shakur,
the transfer seems to be part of a more general move by the Bureau of
Prisons to prevent programs that have had an "impact on the
transformation of dozens of men, from a criminal mentality to
liberation consciousness." The transfers and other intimidation by the
bureau seem intended to make it difficult for these prisoners to build
networks of support. Other aspects of this campaign include the
suspension of cultural and educational programs within the federal
prison systems and the increased harassment of politically active
prisoners.

As mentioned above, another ongoing case involving former Black
Panthers and the government is that of the San Francisco 8. This case
against eight former Panthers and Panther supporters charged with the
murder of a San Francisco policeman in 1971 was thrown out of court in
1975 because the evidence used by the prosecution was obtained by
torture. It was revived in the early part of the twenty-first century
by the California attorney general with help from the US Justice
Department. There seems to be no new evidence in the case, although the
prosecution hints that some does exist. DNA taken from all of the
defendants in 2005 failed to match any previous evidence and the
prosecution has hinted that it will reintroduce the same evidence
thrown out back in 1975 because it was extracted by torture. Evidence
obtained by torture is not considered to be verifiable beyond a
reasonable doubt precisely because it was obtained by torture.

Anybody following the current debate around the U.S. rendition program
for terror suspects is quite familiar with the proven argument that
torture does not produce credible evidence. Of course, if the purpose
of the torture is something other than the procurement of credible
evidence or confessions, than it doesn't really matter as to its
effectiveness.

In the case of the San Francisco 8, it appears that the prosecution was
not so much interested in finding the people responsible for the
killing of the San Francisco policeman in 1971 as it was interested in
helping to destroy the already splintered Black Panther Party. As any
student studying the COINTELPRO program can tell you, one of its
primary goals was the destruction of the Panthers. This goal was
pursued by a variety of means. Among them was murder, the spreading of
false rumors concerning the members' personal lives, the placing of
snitch jackets on members, and the intentional framing of its members
on felony charges.

The case of the San Francisco 8 falls under the latter category but is
also unique if only because the entire case was based on police
speculation and torture. None of the accused was ever found guilty of
the murder the first time they were tried. After the torture was
exposed in 1975, the prosecution's case was thrown out. The men who
were not in prison on other charges (of a questionable nature as well)
returned to their communities and lived active and law abiding lives
until 2005. In 2005, the Department of Homeland security revived the
same case that had been discarded in 1975. Together with the State of
California they convened a grand jury and called many of the same
defendants to testify. To their credit, the men refused and served time
for their refusal. In 2006, DNA was extracted from the men by the
prosecution in the hope that this evidence could be tied to evidence
from the 1971 crime scene. After more than a year of silence, the
defense was told that none of the DNA samples matched any of the
evidence. Despite this, the prosecution refuses to drop the case and
appears to be intent on resubmitting the evidence obtained under
torture back in the early 1970s despite the earlier court's refusal to
allow that same evidence. Randy Montesano, the attorney of Harold
Taylor--one of the defendants-told the media after a motion to deny
admission of the torture-extracted evidence that despite the refusal of
the court to approve the motion "there is no way to get a fair hearing
today, especially given the delay of so many years and (because) the
passage of time alone precludes any reliable adjudication B- so we will
ultimately prevail."

One respects Mr. Montesano's optimism, yet it can not be emphasized
enough that this case may not go the way it should (and the defense
hopes it will) unless the light of the world is shown upon it. It will
take the concerted effort of a popular movement to insure that the men
known as the San Francisco 8 are not framed for the murder of the
policeman in 1971. The alternative for these men would be spending the
rest of their lives in prison, much like the future faced by Mumia abu
Jamal. In fact, it is the growing popular movement supporting the San
Francisco 8 that helped convince the judge in the case to lower the
bail of most of the men and allow them to go home to their loved ones.
Likewise, in the case of Mumia abu Jamal, it is the popular movement
around his case that has kept him alive.

[Ron Jacobs is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather
Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs' essay on Big
Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch's collection on music, art and
sex, Serpents in the Garden. His first novel, Short Order Frame Up, is
published by Mainstay Press. He can be reached at:
rjacobs3625 at charter.net ]