At every turn, Mumia Abu-Jamal has been denied justice in his case.

Convicted for the tragic 1981 shooting of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner, the judicial and political machine in the "City of Brotherly Love" has had it out for Abu-Jamal from day one.

He was a thorn in the side of the system because not only was he a former Black Panther Party member who wore dread locks, but he was a radio journalist with brash outspokenness on issues of justice. He was particularly outspoken in support of MOVE, a back-to-nature, revolutionary group which had done battle with police and was at odds with the city�s administration.

But his position on MOVE not only upset the city�s top brass, it also irritated some Blacks. He was fired from jobs with Black media.

For the city, however, getting Abu-Jamal to court could settle it all. They could get him out of the way with a murder conviction of a cop, regardless of the truth and the facts of the case.

He was shackled during parts of his trial. He was not allowed to defend himself or have the adviser he requested at his table. He was physically muzzled. He was tried before a judge who was a life member of the Fraternal Order of Police and known as the "hanging judge" because of the number of people he sent to death row. And he was assigned an incompetent lawyer, just to name a few of the injustices of the case.

The most recent affront to justice in the case came Aug. 17 during a status hearing in Philadelphia before Common Pleas Judge Pamela Pryor Dembe. Abu-Jamal was kept from the hearing�housed in a jail cell some 350 miles away in Pittsburgh�because Philadelphia officials claimed there was no holding cell available for the death row inmate, a fact most observers find ridiculous considering the space that is found everyday to house the brothers and sisters picked up by the cops.

"The right to be present in the courtroom has been denied through no fault of my own," Abu-Jamal said in a statement read out in court by his attorney Marlene Kamish.

The reason he was not allowed in the court is because his presence�his first court appearance in five years�would have enlivened an already high-spirited crowd of hundreds of demonstrators who showed up outside the court to support him.

The tension in any courtroom where Abu-Jamal�s case is discussed is always thick, with both sides convinced of their positions.

Watching the protesters from a courthouse window, Faulkner�s widow, Maureen, said: "They [protesters] made the wrong decision in making Mumia Abu-Jamal their poster boy. He knows what he did. He tried to portray himself as a martyr and a victim but the true victim was Danny [Faulkner]."

However, Rev. Jesse Jackson, on hand to support Abu-Jamal, told reporters: "In the case of Mumia, there is no absolute certainty that he did the killing in the first place."

And that�s the problem. There are too many discrepancies, too many outright injustices in the case to send Abu-Jamal to the death chamber. Especially, since we have witnessed in recent years scores of people released from death row because they were innocent, and sometimes because of crooked cops, prosecutors and judges.

Let there be no mistake in this case. If Abu-Jamal is guilty, he must serve his sentence. If he is innocent, he must be freed.

But, given what has already happened, justice will never be served unless Abu-Jamal is given another trial � without a "hanging judge" or incompetent lawyers.