In his usual humble way, Mumia does not mention that this Batson issue was arguably the key issue recently before the Third Circuit re his own case (the prosecutor used 10-11 of his 15 strikes against otherwise acceptable black jurors). The 3 Judge panel voted 2-1 against his claim, but Judge Ambro’s dissenting opinion declared that the court had actually created new standards for a Batson claim, when it denied Mumia’s claim. Here are a few interesting points re Mumia’s case:

---On May 17, before The US Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Christina Swarns of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund argued that that there is strong evidence of racist jury selection at the 1982 trial. The LDF Amicus Brief concludes, “it becomes abundantly clear that he has set forth a prima facie case of discrimination,” based on the standards established by the US Supreme Court’s 1986 Batson v. Kentucky ruling, establishing a defendant’s right to a new trial if proven that jurors were excluded on the basis of race.

---The LDF argues that DA prosecutor McGill's conduct “strongly suggested discriminatory intent,” and other evidence “strongly suggests” that this discrimination “was common practice,” in the DA's office. At Abu-Jamal’s trial, McGill used 10-11 of his 15 peremptory challenges to remove otherwise acceptable black jurors.

---Philadelphia was over 40% black, but the jury had 10 whites and only 2 blacks. A survey of homicide cases tried by McGill from Sept., 1981 to Oct., 1983, reveals, “the odds that Mr. McGill would peremptorily challenge an African-American potential juror were 8.47 times greater than for non-black jurors.”

---From 1977-1986 (when current Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell was the District Attorney), Philadelphia prosecutors struck 58% of black jurors, but only 22% of the white jurors.

For more on Batson (including the full one hour McMahon videotape (the best stuff is in the last 15 minutes), check out this link:

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=277814902&blogID=333420948