I first heard about Mumia Abu-Jamal earlier this year. I was walking down the street in downtown Chicago where I work and someone handed me a flyer. It was all about Mumia, his predicament of supposedly being wrongfully imprisoned and sentenced to death, and that he was never given a fair trial. All of these issues are dealt with in the documentary Mumia Abu-Jamal: A Case for Reasonable Doubt? which appears to have originally aired on HBO in 1996. The film was recently re-released this year on DVD.
I love watching stuff like this. The Thin Blue Line and Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills for instance. And the kind of case file examinations you see on Court TV or the Discover channel at 1 AM. Ambiguous court cases. Conflicting evidence. Motives and evidence coming from every different angle.
The title of the movie mentions "reasonable doubt". We are presented the facts argued by the prosecution, but generally the film feels like it is taking the side of the defense, arguing that the Philadelphia Police Department and the judge in the case were biased against Mumia from the starts. From the very moment police arrived on the scene of the crime, through collecting and recording evidence, through selection of the jury, through coercion of witnesses, through suppression of evidence, and through the sentencing process we are shown how Mumia may not have had a fair trial. When it's all over the films seems to be asking the viewers whether at this point there is a reasonable doubt left that Mumia may be innocent.
Now I'm not too knowledgeable about what the exact definition of a "reasonable" doubt is within our court system. But my personal definition seems to include smaller levels of doubt than many average people, especially when emotions or other agendas are involved. It may be what appeals to me in these kinds of films. The suspicion that the system is against the individual. The audacity I see in many people who seem so certain of pronouncing someone guilty and heaping such immense sentences on that person when the ratio of certainty vs. the extent of the punishment seems to be way off. The fear that I may by accident be targeted as the patsy by a system that cares not for any individual rights of any individual if impeding on them suits their ulterior motives.
Now I'm not saying that Mumia's case clearly fits that bill, but this is the sentiment that draws me to be interested in these types of cases.
After watching this movie I have done some slight additional investigation on the matter. There are additional pieces of information left out of this film, some more conspicuous than others. And of course there have been several additional developments in the matter during the twelve years since this movie was released.
The murder that Mumia was convicted of occurred in 1981, the same year I was born. When this movie first came out Mumia had been in prison on death row for fourteen years. Now in 2008 it has been twenty-six years since the incident. At this time Mumia is no longer on death row, but still in prison with a life sentence. But as evidenced by the fact that earlier this year I received a flyer regarding his predicament (and I think some kind of big rally taking place) there are still massive social movements that have grown out of this case. The case has become the impetus for groups arguing for as many issues as racism, police and judicial corruption, freedom of speech, and a lot more. In fact a movie documenting not only the case itself but the way it has affected and become the icon for so many other social and political groups and movements might be a more relevant and conscientious documentary than this film is. Is it possible that this film could help get Mumia freed like the film The Thin Blue Line did? It's unlikely at this point, but it probably has helped to increase the awareness that has fueled all of these social movements.
After looking at ratings and reviews for this film on different websites you may assume that giving a high rating for this film means you think Mumia is innocent and a low rating means you think he is guilty. I rate this film highly even though I am really not sure because the film is very engaging without being deceptive. You can always do your own research later. But some of the most compelling portions of the movie have to be the emotional testimonies from a couple people who claim to have witnessed events that suggest Mumia's innocence and how they were coerced by the police to lie under oath. The fact that Mumia is so well spoken doesn't hurt the fascination with his case either.
Like the jurors in one of my favorite films 12 Angry Men, I look at these cases and seek to find any possible doubt, put it altogether and ask myself "is it reasonable?" In the case of Mumia, I have not made up my mind, but if you find these kinds of questionable court case studies fascinating I highly recommend checking out the recent re-release of this film on DVD.
Other recommendations: The Thin Blue Line, Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills
Rating: 9/10