FOREGONE CONCLUSION OF THE YEAR: Apologies to the annual Pagonging of the doofuses, to the east- and south-biased BCS's annual screwing of a west coast team, and to the fact that at 3:00 on a sunny day my west-facing office will be 95 degrees. This year's Isaac-sponsored ALOTT5MA Foregone Conclusion of the Year was ratified today, when the jury recommended the death penalty for Scott Peterson.
Leaving aside the circumstantial evidence of guilt and lack of remorse so clear that it became sort of an E! News Extra primer on "Anatomy of a Case," this one was in the books before it started. The rule is simple. If you have no personal stake and you've heard about the case, the jury will vote for the death penalty. It is a near-scientific certainty that if you have been identified on the cover of Us Magazine as a capital defendant, you should feel free to take up smoking and fatty foods. There are two decent explanations for this. First, protestations to the contrary aside, juries may be affected by the media coverage or by people who have been affected by the media coverage. Second, the things that make a case sexy to the media are the same things that make it revolting to a jury.
I can think of only two occasionally successful exceptions to this rule: (1) you had a co-defendant worse than you are (Nichols; Malvo); or (2) you got a jury to hang the first time (Menendez brothers). Corollary to (2): Juries generally don't give the death penalty while acquitting (Simpson).
Anything I'm missing?
No comments:
Post a Comment