Justice was FINALLY Served: Greg Taylor IS INNOCENT!

Pictured Above is Chris Mumma (Defense Attorney for Greg Taylor) and freshly innocent Greg Taylor.

To watch the verdict click here, and to skip the legalese and get to the decision skip to 4:20 of the video -------> http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/7064143/

For the news article click here -----> http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/7063377/

For about the past week and a half the North Carolina Innocence Commission has been holding a hearing at my school in the Business Courtroom. This hearing would decide the fate of Greg Taylor, a man who was convicted of the murder of JaQuetta Thomas in 1993. It would decide whether he would go free without shackles to begin the rest of his life as a free man, or to continue serving his life sentence. He spent 17 years in jail and has claimed innocence from the very beginning. In order for him to go free he had to prove by the facts by "clear and convincing" evidence that he was innocent. This standard means the defense would have to prove that it was highly probable that he did not commit the crime. If I were to put it in percentages, let's say that they would have to show at a point higher than 51% but less than 99%, so somewhere in the 70% range. (just something to give the non-legal world to understand the term "clear and convincing evidence)


(This is a Picture of Greg Taylor right before entering the press conference)


(This is a picture of Greg Taylor, his family, and some supporters during the press conference in the lobby at Campbell Law)

I was able to witness the closing arguments and the reading of the verdict today at school. When sitting in the room listening to the prosecution, I could just feel the emotion, the tension, and the frustration in the room of the family members and supporters of Mr.Taylor. There were constant outbursts(understandably so)in the room when the Prosecution would say something, in my opinion, that just made no logical sense at all.

Before I tell you my opinion on it, I would first like to say that before today, I was not privy to the information about the evidence given during the hearing last week because I had been in class and unable to attend the viewing of the presentation of evidence.

During closing arguments, we first heard from the Prosecution (the State). I was quickly able to see that their strategy was to try and discredit the testimony of the witnesses for the defense and to show contradictions in evidence. No, I am not yet an attorney, or an expert at any of this, BUT I was quickly able to see that the Prosecution did NOT have much of a case. The closing argument was not easy to follow because it was a lot of "he said, then she said" going on. He stumbled over his words a lot as well. There was nothing mentioned of their inability to present all of the exculpatory evidence that they possessed. There was nothing mention of their suggestive criminal identification strategies. Just merely the phrase, that supposedly came from an eyewitness that "a black leather jacket looked like a black mini-skirt." That definitely raised in eyebrow with me. Evidence that the SBI withheld exculpatory evidence was presented, and the SBI wouldnt own it, simply treated it as though their actions were permissible. There was plenty of evidence that would raise a reasonable doubt about the guilt or Mr.Greg Taylor, yet the withholding of evidence and unfortunately misleading information led to his guilty verdict in 1993 and subsequent appeals.

The Defense came out swinging on closing arguments. Stating that the Prosecution has what they called "confirmatory bias" which meant that there was no evidence that Taylor committed the crime in question, but the Prosecution was so biased against him, that no matter what evidence came through the pipes, they would somehow tie it to him in order to get a conviction. There was evidence that Taylor returned to the scene of the crime with his wife and boss, and even let the prosecution search everything he owned. He refused a pleas offer, even after being threatened with a life sentence, and he refused leniency. Wouldnt that raise and eyebrow to you? There was even evidence, that in Taylor's "so called" confession, that he got the cause of death of the victim wrong.

I dont know what jury after seeing this evidence could have convicted this man. Im not even sure why during the appeals process, the Prosecution couldnt get off their high horses and admit they were wrong to withhold evidence. Instead Taylor had to spend 17 years of his life in prison.

It took a 3 judge panel to unanimously agree that Taylor, by clear and convincing evidence, has proven his innocence.

The legal field can be a wonderful place when justice is served, but there is also a very ugly side to it. When justice isnt served, we all suffer directly and/or indirectly.

I stood in awe at Mr. Taylor's humility and forgiving heart. When they asked him was he angry, he said no. He was just grateful that today had come. Im not sure that I could have been so free.

Im sure that this occurrence is not just North Carolina specific, and I believe that more states should have such a commission. Taylor had used up all of his appeals and his only recourse came when the innocence commission was put into place.

I urge all of us in the legal field to do our jobs to the best of our abilities. We can zealously be an advocate for our clients while still remaining ethical and morally correct. Let us be the attorneys we would want to represent us and that we would want to represent our profession.