July 16, 2009

BY JAMES M. SIMMONS

The recent dismissal of all charges against four of the last five remaining defendants in the San Francisco 8 case was the cause for celebration all around. For the four defendants, it was the sudden relief that this segment of a personal 38-year nightmare was coming to a close. For their supporters, the tense vigil for these ex-Black Panthers, who were facing death in prison for the 1971 killing of a San Francisco police sergeant, was almost over. 

As for the prosecution, they were apparently satisfied that two of the eight defendants pled out to lesser charges, as so-called “proof” that the entire prosecution was justified. With everyone so happy, one might believe that everybody, especially the defendants and their supporters, believes the system worked here. No. No. No.

In addition to the fact that Francisco Torres remains a defendant with a preliminary hearing on murder and conspiracy charges set to start in August, there are numerous good reasons to point out the abject failure of what some call the “system of criminal injustice.”

These men, ranging in age from late 50s to early 70s, have spent the last two-and-a-half years fighting murder charges. Much of that time has been in jail under exorbitant bail. They, their families, friends and associates have spent the last seven years being hounded by detectives and grand juries, some even being jailed for refusing to cooperate with this blatant political persecution.

Herman Bell and Jalil Muntaqim pled to lesser charges and received probation and time-served jail sentences, sacrificing their right to fight the charges in exchange for dismissal of all charges against Richard Brown, Hank Jones, Ray Boudreaux and Harold Taylor. An eighth defendant, Richard O’Neal, had his case dismissed last year for lack of evidence.

Tragically, the defendants had already spent time in jail in the mid-1970s for these very same alleged crimes, and the case was thrown out back then. A court in 1975 ordered all charges dismissed after a factual finding that the New Orleans Police Department, with accomplices from the San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York police departments and the FBI, used electric cattle prods, plastic bags closed over the head to smother, scalding hot water poured onto towels against the skin, and straight pins pushed into the genitals of those they accused of being members of a clandestine Black Liberation Army at war with the United States.

They wanted confessions and instead got stories they wanted to hear from people who could not stand the tortuous interrogations any longer.

What is more, not one single police officer, federal agent or prosecutor has been brought to justice for their crimes against the San Francisco 8. 

Truth be told, prosecuting agencies seldom go after law enforcement officers for crimes of this nature. A prime example of this is the notorious Chicago Police Department’s Area 2 torture squad led by Commander Jon Burge. False confessions resulting from the physical torture of scores of black men, women and children as young as 13 years old is cited as a reason why the governor of Illinois put a moratorium on executions in the state.

No single torturer was charged with a crime, even after a judge appointed a special prosecutor to avoid the obvious conflict of interest with local prosecutorial agencies. 

Even rarer is the prosecution of a prosecutor who brings a case without evidence to support it. One such example is the Duke University rape prosecution where District Attorney Mike Nifong brought rape charges against white college athletes supported primarily by statements from the black female complaining witness. Accused of filing the case without sufficient evidence and for political reasons, the full weight of the courts and the North Carolina State Bar came to bear on Nifong and he was disbarred and jailed for contempt of court.

The case against the San Francisco 8 was rejected by federal prosecutors and San Francisco’s district attorney. It defies good sense that this stale, patently defective political case would be filed and pursued by California Attorney General Jerry Brown with no credible evidence, but it was — and still is. He has extracted his pound of flesh from Herman Bell and Jalil Muntaqim, so there is no need to continue this tragedy by further persecuting Torres.

Brown should take the most honorable and legal course and dismiss this case, which stands for support of torture and against human rights and the rule of law.

The system has miserably failed the San Francisco 8. Only a vigorous investigation and prosecution of the torturers, their accomplices, and their enablers would even begin to address the issue of whether or not this is a system of criminal justice that works, or is a criminal system of injustice.

Attorney James M. Simmons, from Human Rights Advocacy in Los Angeles, can be contacted at humanrightsadv@gmail.com.