Abu-Jamal was denied the right to represent himself and was instead represented by a court assigned lawyer who barley knew the case and did not have money to conduct a proper defense. I find it a bit funny that these court assigned lawyers who are hired by the system never have adequate representation to be successful in a trial.
As Abu-Jamal continues to fight against his sentence and conviction documents, execution and analyzes crime and punishment in the United State, he criticizes American response to crime by building more prisons and expanding the use of the death penalty. He declares that a defendant's right to a fair and impartial jury of peers, the right to represent oneself, and the right to a fair trial are not really rights, but privileges of the powerful and rich and myths for everyone else. With these so-called rights they do not pertain to everyone in which they should, everyone who is a citizen of the United States. Abu-Jamal's writings also examine and critique major Supreme Court cases of the last 150 years, including Dred Scott v. Sanford, McClesky v. Kemp, and Hance v. Zant. In presenting these cases, Abu-Jamal argues that racism exists in the American court system and white lives are valued more than black lives. In one essay, he shows that "cases involving black defendants and white victims are more likely to result in a death sentence than cases featuring any other racial combination of defendant and victim." He also demonstrates that officials of all stage treat African-Americans differently from whites. In one essay, he notes that a nationwide pattern of violent assaults by white police officers against minorities, which has come to light in more recent years. In the past many white officers got away with violent assaults against minorities, but with the rapid growth of technology (video cameras) the victims are able to prove their case.
Abu-Jamal also discusses the word correction from "correctional system".
