In March 1986, the Philadelphia Special Investigation Commission released a 500-page report that would become the definitive official account of the MOVE bombing. The commission’s language was unusually direct for a government document. They used words like “unconscionable,” “gross negligence,” and “reckless.”
Then everyone ignored their recommendations and no one went to prison.
This document presents the Commission’s key findings with analysis of what they meant—and why they didn’t lead to accountability.
About the Commission
Official Name: Philadelphia Special Investigation Commission (also called “MOVE Commission”)
Appointed: November 1985 by Mayor W. Wilson Goode
Chairman: William H. Brown III (attorney, former EEOC chairman)
Members: 11 total – mix of community leaders, attorneys, academics
Powers: Subpoena authority, full access to city records, ability to compel testimony
Timeline: November 1985 – March 1986 (approximately 4 months)
Process:
- Over 100 witnesses testified
- Thousands of pages of documents reviewed
- Public hearings held
- Expert analysis commissioned
Final Report: Released March 6, 1986 – titled “The Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations of the Philadelphia Special Investigation Commission”
The Central Finding: “Unconscionable”
The Quote
“Dropping a bomb on an occupied row house was unconscionable.”
Source: Philadelphia Special Investigation Commission Report, March 1986, Executive Summary
What This Means
Unconscionable is a legal and moral term meaning:
- Beyond the limits of what is acceptable
- Shockingly unfair or unjust
- Indefensible by any reasonable standard
- Lacking in conscience or moral principles
When an official government commission uses this word, they’re not hedging. They’re not saying “questionable” or “problematic” or “regrettable.” They’re saying: this should never have happened under any circumstances.
Why This Matters
This wasn’t activists saying it. This wasn’t MOVE supporters saying it. This was a commission appointed by the mayor who approved the bombing, staffed with establishment figures, given full access to all evidence.
And they still concluded the bombing was unconscionable.
That makes the subsequent lack of criminal charges even more damning. When your own commission says it was unconscionable, and you still don’t prosecute, that’s a choice—a choice to prioritize protecting officials over holding them accountable.