Case Summary
Abu-Ali Abdur’Rahman
Abu’s Case Is Unique for Several Reasons
Abu’s is the only Tennessee case in which the death sentence has been sustained even though all judges who have reviewed the case, along with the A.G. and the District Attorney, concede that Abu’s trial lawyers failed to adequately represent him. In other words, there is no dispute that Abu never had a fair trial.
Abu’s is the only case in Tennessee in which two judges – federal District Court Judge Todd Campbell and Davidson County Criminal Court Judge Monte Watkins – have independently set aside the death sentence.
Abu’s is the only Tennessee case in which two other judges– 6th Circuit Judge Cole and Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Birch (making a total of four judges from four courts) – have independently written that Abu’s death sentence should be set aside.
Abu’s Trial Was Unfair Because of the Prosecutor’s Misdeeds
Abu did not have a fair trial because the prosecutor engaged in a pervasive scheme of suppression of evidence and deception. Among other things, he:
Hid the blood evidence from the jury – evidence that shows Abu could not have been the killer.
Suppressed all evidence regarding the motive and circumstances behind the offense.
Knowingly elicited false testimony from the co-defendant, who had worked out a deal with the prosecutor, regarding the motive and circumstances behind the crime.
Suppressed all evidence regarding Abu’s mental health problems.
Suppressed evidence regarding Abu’s prior second-degree murder conviction.
Lied to Middle Tennessee Mental Health Institute in connection with its mental health evaluation of Abu. Among other things, he knowingly misrepresented:
That Abu did not raise an insanity defense at his prior trial, which was not true.
That the prior offense was a gang-related “drug turf war” to gain control of the drug trade in prison, which was not true.
That the killing in this case was an effort to take over the drug trade in Nashville, which was not true.
Lied to defense counsel that the prior offense was part of a “drug turf war” in prison, which was not true.
Lied to the court and the jury that there was no evidence of Abu’s mental illness, which was untrue.
Used race in jury selection.
Slipped inadmissible evidence to the jury, shortly after the trial judge instructed him not to.
Held up Abu’s coat to the jury, calling it a “gangster coat,” knowing that the coat lacked any blood staining, meaning that Abu was not the killer.
Abu’s Trial Was Unfair Because His Lawyers Did Nothing in His Defense
Abu did not have a fair trial because his defense lawyers were ineffective for a number of reasons, including:
They conducted no investigation whatsoever.
They met with Abu only once, and that was not until the week prior to trial.
They never knew about the blood evidence that demonstrates Abu was not the killer.
They did not cross examine the co-defendant or offer any proof about the circumstances leading up to the crime, because they did not know about the circumstances.
They introduced no mitigation evidence at the sentencing hearing because they didn’t know about it, even though, in the words of Judge Todd Campbell, it was “available,” “abundant,” “credible” and “compelling.”
The Judicial System Broke Down in Abu’s Case
Abu’s case was never thoroughly reviewed by the courts because, among other things:
The federal court, for the first time, gave Abu’s habeas attorneys the resources and opportunity to develop a complete evidentiary record during a two-week hearing. The federal district court vacated Abu’s death sentence based on ineffective assistance of defense counsel.
But, in a 2-to-1 decision, the 6th Circuit Court reversed Judge Campbell’s judgment and reinstated Abu’s death sentence. The two-judge majority rested their reinstatement of Abu’s death sentence on a ground that Abu was not “prejudiced” by the failures of his defense lawyers, even though the Tennessee Attorney General never made that claim based on the evidence presented in federal court; and the parties never briefed or argued that issue. Judge Cole wrote a strong dissent.
Subsequently the same panel, voting 2-to-1, held that most of Abu’s prosecutorial misconduct claims and his cumulative error claim were “procedurally defaulted” because Abu’s state post-conviction counsel failed to properly raise those claims in state court. Judge Cole wrote strong dissenting opinions.
This means that the only judge who heard the live witnesses and all of the evidence, federal District Court Judge Todd Campbell, and one of the judges on the 6th Circuit panel, Judge Cole, voted to vacate the death sentence. However, two of the most conservative judges on the 6th Circuit, who did not hear the live testimony, voted to uphold the death sentence without considering most of the claims of prosecutorial misconduct or the claim of “cumulative error.”
No court, even federal Judge Todd Campbell, has ever cumulatively reviewed all of the claims of constitutional error along with all of the evidence that was presented in the federal district court to determine whether Abu’s trial, taken as a whole, was constitutionally unfair.
Abu Contributes Much to his Prison Unit
Throughout his 32-plus years on death row, Abu has been a model prisoner. (He is 69 years old.)
On death row, Abu has consistently been an agent of peace and reconciliation, working closely with both staff and other inmates to bring about positive change within the prison community.
Abu is one of the principal developers of a conflict resolution program, sponsored by professors from David Lipscomb University and the American Baptist College and supported by the prison administration, which has helped to transform the environment within his prison unit. It is now the most peaceful unit in the prison.
This program has also helped inmates reconcile with family and friends outside of prison.
Abu is working with the college faculty sponsors to expand the conflict resolution program to other units in the prison, with the support of the prison administration.
Promoting peace and reconciliation within the prison brings meaning and purpose to Abu’s life.
Executing Abu would eliminate an important force for good within the prison.