The meaning of “Legally not guilty,” means that the prosecution did not prove guilt, e.g. there is not enough evidence; there are not enough eye witnesses A first point as to why Mumia is legally not guilty is the Batson VS. Kentucky 1986 Supreme Court Case that says that prosecutors are not permitted to kick black people off of juries simply because they are black. This case set the legal precedent to preclude dismissal of a juror base on being black. In Mumia’s case, the prosecution had 15 peremptory challenges like for any undisclosed reason; the attorney may dismiss a potential juror. In the Mumia case the prosecutor violated the Batson decision and used 10 peremptory challenges to remove black people as jurors. Secondly, during the closing argument in the Mumia case, the prosecution and said: ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Mumia Abu-Jamal is on trial for the murder of a Philadelphia Police officer; you heard the evidence and you are to find this man guilty because if you do not then he will file appeal after appeal , after appeal . Notwithstanding, the objective of the jury is to find the defendant guilty or not guilty based on the evidence presented to them. They are entrusted with dealing with the evidence presented and based on that find the person guilty or not; this is their objective and their instruction by the jurist. The prosecution advised the jurors against that well known legal edict for jurors suggesting that if they find him guilty, then Mumia can file appeal after appeal. That is, the prosecution was suggesting to the jury by finding him mistakenly, it still will not be over because he will keep filing appeals and by those appeals someone else will fix that mistake. This is a contravention of the 5th Amendment to the Constitution: “nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;” as well as the 14th Amendment. One Amendment says that the Federal government cannot do that in a trial and the other shows that the State cannot do that in the trial. Therefore, the D.A. of Philadelphia cannot legally do that. The D.A.’s office was advising the jury to find Mumia guilty and if there was a mistake then someone else will later fix it. The third reason was the trial judge, Sabo. Sabo told the prosecutor in the presence of the court stenographer that: “I’m going to help them fry that nigger.” (By the way the stenographer was a white female whose consort was a white male state trooper). Sabo resided over 32 death penalty cases, that 24 of which were reversed on appeal by the appellate court. Furthermore, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated that Sabo used,” extremely prejudicial comments.”
The meaning of “factually innocent means in fact the person did not do the accused crime. The first deals with the bullets and the gun. The ballistic experts for the Philadelphia D.A.’s office checked the bullet that was in the murdered police officer and checked the gun they claimed Mumia had and indicated that they did not match. So therefore the ballistic results are not conclusive (the bullet found in the police officer was a .44 caliber bullet but the gun they claimed Mumia used to murder the officer was a .38 caliber). Furthermore, there is the issue of blow-back of gun powder, paraffin. When person fires a pistol, there will be residue from the firing of that pistol; blow-back. The test is called a paraffin test. When the