Too Much Contradictory Evidence in Imam Jamil al-Amin Case
by Amina Saeed

I am saddened by the media's condemnation of Imam Jamil Al-Amin.

Thirty years after its heyday, the media's fascination with the Black Panther Party is still so strong that an accused man has been branded guilty even before the jury hears the evidence, simply by virtue of his short, five-month membership in that now-defunct organization.

The coverage seems particularly unfair since the sensational headlines and reports unduly emphasize his distant past over his recent past as a strong and effective community activist who is responsible for the tremendous improvements in and reform of his neighborhood.

Before I continue, I would like to preface my comments by emphasizing that in no way do I condone the act of evading law enforcement authorities by escaping from possible captivity.

Imam Jamil: a black man in the deep South

Having said that, I'll add that this is, at base, the story of a black man in the deep South, a man with a colorful and somewhat notorious past who, by all appearances, has turned his life around. Now that he has been apprehended, let us pray that he receive justice in the Georgian judicial system.

Let us pray that he will not suffer the "guilty until proven innocent" plight of countless other black men who face prosecution in the deep southern states.

Let us also pray that Allah grants peace and patience to his wife, Sr. Karima Al-Amin, and their two children. Their life has, no doubt, been a nightmare since Eid-ul-Adha, which most Muslims in Atlanta celebrated on Thursday (March 16, 2000), the day of the shooting.

It appears that the connection to the Imam was initially made only because the incident took place outside his store. It could have been any person on the street, who just happened to be parked or standing in front of Imam Al-Amin's store.

Some questions to consider

According to some reports, the assailant was standing next to the Mercedes, while other reports claim that he was in the car and they asked him to get out. In both scenarios, his hands were in his pockets.

If he was in the car, how did the deputies know that his hands were in his pockets? How far away were the deputies when they instructed their assailant to take his hands out of his pockets?

Picking the wrong black man

Were they right by their squad car or had they advanced closer to the assailant? It was dark outside and the assailant was allegedly black.

American law enforcement officials are notorious for picking up the wrong black man simply because they seem to have a hard time distinguishing between different black men.

Could that be the case here, or is there no question that Deputy English's identification was sound and secure?

Does it matter that the deputy was allegedly still in intensive care when he allegedly picked Imam Al-Amin out of an alleged photo line up in his hospital room?

The warrant

Turning to the alleged warrant--the sheriff's department allegedly considered the warrant a routine one.

Why were the cops serving a routine arrest warrant at around 10 or 10:30 at night? If it was legitimate, why go to a place of business at that time rather than a residence to serve the warrant?

Fulton County sheriff Jackie Barrett has alleged that the Imam "ambushed" her deputies. Well, was she not the one who sent her deputies at night to "ambush" (or call it "surprise" if you will) the Imam with a warrant for his arrest?

Could the Imam have been concealing a rifle and a pistol on his body, waiting for the deputies to come around, so that he could "ambush" them just because they wanted to serve him with a warrant based on misdemeanor charges?

That seems out of character for a man who did not attempt to evade the police when they came to arrest him for the more serious charges of aggravated assault in 1995. According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the deputies were not aware of Imam Al-Amin's colorful past. This begs the question whether the deputies even knew what the Imam looked like.

As far as I know, routine search warrants don't come with pictures attached. And even if they had a mugshot of the Imam in prison garb, like the one that's been making the rounds in the media, that picture, is a far cry from the Imam's physical appearance and dress as a Muslim. Almost looks like two different people, no?

Even if one accepts the story maintained by the police department, it begs the question whether Deputy English had enough time to identify the man who allegedly shot at them? He would have had to make the association within a matter a moments, while he struggled to defend himself from gunfire. Was Deputy English capable of making the connection so quickly, in the dark of night, having never seen the man before?

The bulletproof vest

The Imam was reportedly wearing body armor (a bulletproof vest) when he was arrested.

Authorities have surmised that perhaps he was also wearing a bulletproof vest at the time of the shootings. This would help to explain why the Imam did not have any injuries, despite Deputy English's claim that he shot the assailant.

Although this does sound plausible, it begs a more basic question: why would the Imam be outfitted in a bulletproof vest while standing outside his store on Eid day?

Surely that couldn't be his everyday mode of dress, could it? And then there's the blood. Was it there or wasn't it? Was it old or new? The sheriff's office seems to have a difficult time deciding.

The trail of blood

According to various media reports dated March 18th (2000), officers who arrived at the scene of the shooting followed "a trail of blood" to a vacant house around the corner.

This was one reason why they believed the Imam had been shot. Another reason was because the deputy who identified the Imam as the assailant recalled shooting him.

By March 24th (2000), the police denied finding a "trail of blood." The story changed: the blood was found at the vacant house, and the blood at the scene was old and perhaps unrelated to this incident.

Of course, this report came after the Imam's arrest, when it was noted that he did not have any bullet wounds or other injuries on his body.

The "trail of blood" version of the story also conflicted with the theory that the assailant escaped the scene by driving off in the Mercedes. You can not have it both ways: either the assailant drove off unscathed, or he left behind a pool of blood while he escaped to the vacant house on foot.

This could be a conspiracy against Imam Jamil Al-Amin

The possibility of a setup or a conspiracy simply cannot be discounted at this time.

After all, in 1995 the Atlanta police forced a man to wrongly accuse the Imam of aggravated assault. Why would they want him out of the picture?

Well, his attitude regarding the civil rights movement has, since the days of J. Edgar Hoover's FBI, presented authorities with a reason to keep him under their scrutiny.

Moreover, it is quite probable that the Imam is despised by local gang leaders, since he has been able to reduce their drug trade in the neighborhood. Stories of such neighborhood "good guys" being targeted by gangs are not unheard of in America's inner cities. It is also possible that some cops were not too happy with the Imam's work either.

For example (in March), the Chicago Tribune featured a front-page story about a rogue cop who was a member of the elite special gang crimes unit of the Chicago Police Department.

He engaged in drug deals and ran a drug trafficking operation between Miami and Chicago. He sometimes aided gang leaders to get out of jail quicker with his testimony, since he needed their assistance for his illegal activities.

Similarly, in this case, perhaps not everyone appreciated the Imam's efforts to clean up the neighborhood. There could be people, therefore, who would like to see Imam Al-Amin out of the picture in their community. They tried once in 1995 and failed.

The FBI's involvement

The Federal Bureau of Investigation's involvement in the matter has also left unanswered questions.

On March 21st, the day after the arrest, the Associated Press reports relied on FBI agent Jackson who, it seems, was at the scene of the arrest. He reported that Imam Al-Amin was seen peering out from the shack, immediately began firing at U.S. Marshals when he was discovered, and then ran into the woods.

According to the Associated Press report of March 23rd, Bill Infield, the FBI special agent in charge of the Alabama investigation, stated that the .223 caliber rifle found close by the site of the arrest was believed to be the weapon used to fire at U.S. Marshals who confronted the Imam before his capture.

A few days later, Infield reported that the earlier reports were incorrect, as the FBI found no trace that the Imam had even been in the shack. He also stated that the earlier reports of gunfire by the U.S. Marshals were incorrect.

The Atlanta authorities have alleged that the same weapon was used to fire at the deputies, along with a 9 mm pistol, also found near the shack and the woods.

The start of the problem

Finally, the incident which allegedly triggered this whole fiasco also merits discussion.

One must ask why the Imam failed to appear for a routine court hearing in January. The hearing was related to his May 1999, traffic stop in a different county.

The Imam was charged with driving a stolen vehicle, not having insurance, and impersonating a police officer. I have been told that these are false charges. (I will add that this is hearsay, since I have not found any verification.)

According to what I was told, the Imam had just purchased the car, and the seller was with him in the car. At least one news report has stated that the officer suspected theft only because the car still had dealer plates.

With regard to the cop impersonation, I was told that the Imam showed the cop a certificate or badge he had received for being a good citizen in Alabama. Could this be construed as a badge impersonating a cop?

Furthermore, this incident took place in May 1999, yet he wasn't indicted until October. Why so long?

In contrast, this time around it only took them eight days to secure a grand jury indictment. After the October indictment, was the Imam served with notice of the January court hearing?

Why were Fulton County sheriff's serving a warrant related to an incident that occurred in Cobb County.

A comparison: the Huey Newton case

The similarities between this case and that of a 1967 case against Huey Newton, founder of the Black Panther party, are worthy of comparison.

Newton was stopped for some sort of traffic violations in California, which eventually resulted in the shooting death of a police officer. Newton was charged and eventually acquitted a few years later.

Yet the stakes may be higher in this case, since it will unfold not in a liberal California courtroom, but in Georgia, where wounds of the civil rights era are still fresh and painful for many.

In Stewart County, Georgia, a cross burning incident recently occurred, allegedly involving a member of local government.

The county sheriff, who happens to be an African-American, claims that the men charged with the burning did it only because they were drunk.

The NAACP (the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) disagrees, and has indicated that it will follow the case closely because they believe it was a hate crime.

Similarly, we the Muslim community have a duty to follow this case closely in order to ensure that Imam Jamil Al-Amin receives a fair trial.

Amina Saeed, an attorney, practices appellate law in Chicago. She is a member of the Muslim Bar Association of Chicago.

Share your thoughts and ideas on this issue with others