It might be OK for The Inquirer to promote the new book

Murdered by Mumia

by police widow Maureen Faulkner and Inquirer columnist Michael Smerconish by running excerpts day after day - if there were some critical context ("A widow speaks," Dec. 2). But you didn't even bother to send a reporter to a Dec. 4 news conference that offered new evidence about the fairness of the trial and about whether Mumia Abu-Jamal, who has now spent 26 years on death row for the killing of Police Officer Daniel Faulkner, is even guilty of the crime. In fact, the only "news" article you've written regarding the book was an alleged scoop from its pages, also presented one-sidedly ("Widow links Street to Abu-Jamal case," Dec. 2).

Faulkner condemns actors such as the late Ossie Davis for speaking out in favor of a new trial, and for refusing to "allow the legal process to run its course." Actually, she and her allies, the Fraternal Order of Police, have hardly been letting the legal process "run its course."

Faulkner continues to press for Abu-Jamal's death, even though a federal judge has overturned his death sentence as having been the result of legal errors and wrong instructions from the trial judge. It is she who is not letting the legal process run its course.

The Inquirer is failing in its duty to present both sides of this story.

Dave Lindorff

Maple Glen

» READ MORE: dlindorff@mindspring.com

Dave Lindorff is the author of "Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal."