What it means is -
THE JURY'S OPINION IS THE ONLY OPINION THAT MATTERS.
And, that would be the jury that said Leo was guilty of official misconduct for attempting to retaliate against citizens of this county? Such a weak case and he was still found guilty. At least he has your support, Festus.
You DO realize that he was CLEARED of the most serious felony charges, don't you?
Just an impression here, as I have no idea the specifics of how or why the jury would find him not guilty of the other "more serious" charges like offering a false instrument for filing, etc.:
In reading the news reports on the daily testimony it struck me as interesting that evidence was offered up that former County Manager Sharon Secor sent an email to a constituent that basically said that when Leo signed off on the Florida trip it was done properly. If it was done properly, then fine, he was not guilty of that charge. On the other hand, if Ms. Secor was doing what a great many of the "high level" government managers and department heads often do, it could be possible that her email was just a "CYA" to keep the questions at bay and the heat off a situation that could potentially embarrass the bosses. This is done all the time by managers or administrators or department heads, and not just in the public sector. In this day and age, putting things in writing can go both ways, and more often than not the "powers that be" have no idea how much is actually documented.
I'm not saying this is what the jury would have said to themselves when considering those kinds of charges, but if it were me I would have to consider that the evidence could go either way and in that case he lucks out.