Posted by Lale on 6/7/2011, 11:10:31, in reply to "Re: The Bad Girl and the trial of the century"
173.33.119.10
Unfortunately, I have watched a lot (really A LOT) in the past three weeks. I have watched and read everything that has happened during the past three years. For the past three years, at the check-out lanes of supermarkets, I have been seeing a picture of a child and "mother killed her daughter" type of headlines but I wasn't sure if it was always the same mother and same child, I did not pay enough attention to realize that it was the same case for years on end. 3-4 weeks ago when we were watching Canadian news it caught my attention, so I watched it again the next two evenings. Then, it was complete addiction, obsession, fascination and whatever else it was. I read in minute detail everything that has happened related to the case for the past 3 years. I read thousands of cell phone text messages, I listened to hours and hours of depositions and interviews. The convoluted stories, the enormity and the longevity of the lies were just fascinating. Now, sadly, I am an expert on the case.
: One thing I find interesting about this trial is how
: much coverage it has gotten on TV, in contrast to only
: an occasional paragraph under "Briefs" in
: the newspaper.
I know the answer to this. the reason is a combination of these factors:
- the family is a middle-class family, with a nice home, a father, a mother, a daughter and a son (plus a 2.5 year old granddaughter whom the grandparents absolutely adore and would like to raise like a princess as every little girl should be raised as.) The middle-class status of the family attracts most people because they represent the ordinary majority.
- the young woman who in my belief did cause the death of her own child in some level, is an attractive white woman. (If she belonged to a poverty-stricken ethnic minority family, Americans would not be that interested.)
- this young woman also is such a story-teller (pathological liar with extremely elaborated lies that go on forever with many many fictional characters) that ordinary people have never seen anything like it in their own circles, it is very very easy to be fascinated by the amount and level of these lies. In addition, her parents, for the most part, believe in these lies (who wouldn't? It would never occur to me to doubt my daughter), and when they have some suspicions they try to overlook the inconsistencies. In some cases they are in denial, in some cases they are enablers ... Public is interested in how the lies can go on for so long because it is not common.
- the little girl is absolutely adorable, the sweetest thing you can ever see and you can't take your eyes off of her. I can look at her one picture (the most famous one with her little hand on her chin) for hours.
- because the grandparents loved this baby so much, they had many videos and pictures of her. Availability of these pictures and videos attracted the public attention.
- the fact that a mother who knows her baby is dead and rotting in a swamp, being eaten by animals and maggots, is partying and going on with her life (she never reported her child as missing) is also very unusual for ordinary people and fascinates them.
So, in my opinion, a combination of all these caused the intense public interest.
: form an opinion on it or to compare Ms. Anthony with
: the "bad girl."
They are both concerned about themselves and themselves only. Most of what Sterling said about the bad girl applies to Casey Anthony, I think. The only difference is bad girl talks less, gives as little information as possible and she keeps her lies brief. In Casey Anthony's case, she spins long tales with a lot of detail and embellishments, partly to cover up for previous lies and partly because that's just the way she operates.
: I am not sure if this jury system is the best system
: we can come up with.
:
: What system would be an improvement? Judges are
: political, and the more power you give them, the more
: political they will become.
Judges are political, they can be bought or threatened (as is the case in Turkey right now), so i would not want the final decision to rest between the two lips of one judge. But I don't think the lay person jury system is working either. Maybe the jury should consist of a combination of law students, law professors, defence lawyers and prosecutors randomly selected from all across the country. Actually, I think it would be great to have a jury of law students, it would be part of their education, they would argue with one another, they have the training and ability to look at all aspects of the evidence and the arguments and the law itself. They would do better than lay persons.
: And wall-to-wall media coverage certainly doesn't
: help.
:
: I agree, and I think allowing cameras in the courtroom
: may not be in the best interest of justice. The public
: has a right to know, but the defendant and witnesses
: should have some privacy as well, and trial lawyers
: should focus on the case at hand instead of trying to
: become TV celebrities.
Exactly. There shouldn't be any cameras in the courtroom. This is not allowed in Canada. There are journalists in the courtroom but no photography is allowed. All the public gets is the artists' drawings of the defendants and others in the courtroom. It is much better that way.
: But
: when it is so public, so hyped-up, juries don't dare
: to find defendants guilty.
:
: Why do you say that?
I say that because juries have let OJ Simpson and Michael Jackson walk. There must be some psychological reason why juries are less inclined to convict celebrities. Maybe Sterling can say something on that point.
: I also don't believe in sequestered juries.
:
: But with, as you say, so much media coverage, is there
: a choice?
The choice is no cameras in the courtroom and let the jury go home every night and sleep in their own beds and see their families and do whatever they want to do when they are not in the courtroom. After weeks of prison-like life, they do not want to stay there to deliberate, to examine the evidence, they just want to be done with it. The easiest way to be done with it is to say "reasonable doubt."
Lale
Message Thread | Skip to this response ↓
« Back to index