Flush from her payout trek to Disney for her first interview, Juror 3, Jennifer Ford, is at it again. Despite the apoplectic reaction to the Casey Anthony verdict, our girl Jenny craved another closeup, and CNN's Gary Tuchman gave it to her. One can only hope the interview didn't involve Jenny collecting any further perks - or currency. Just as a dog isn't rewarded for tinkling on the carpet, interviewers shouldn't reward inane chatter with a payout, in any form.
To secure the second interview with Ford, Tuchman told CNN's Anderson Cooper that Jenny agreed to speak again because Tuchman assured her that he was "trying to paint a human portrait" of what jurors have gone through in returning to their lives after to the trial.
Perched on a pier, Mensa reject Jenny sports plenty of attitude and a faint sneer throughout most of Tuchman's questioning. Though she claims the fallout from the verdict has been "very stressful", Jenny is one tough babe. "I'm kind of a scrappy girl. So I'm not going to back away from anything and run scared and crying, that's for sure."
Snickering slightly, Jenny refers to the media clamoring outside her door and the angry public as "the welcoming committee" that greeted her upon her return to Pinellas County. She would have us know that the hate mail she's received is never read beyond the first sentence, before it's tossed in the trash. She's also seen similar commentary on Facebook, and has brilliantly deduced that it's "probably from the same person."
Earth to Jenny: it's more then one person. Put away the souvenier mouse ears and consider a summer course in remedial math.
Though a few synapses are clearly not firing in her brain, Jenny feels the unwashed masses can't grasp what really went on. Ingest this deep commentary: "It makes me feel like, I don't know. I feel like people are missing something...To me, I think it would be a good thing to know that people are trying to do what they're supposed to do and uphold the letter of the law and not be emotional. But apparently that's not something that is rewarded by the public sometimes...a lot of people have been supportive. And even if they didn't agree with our verdict they're like...still respectful. I think it might be a small population who's loud and angry and unkind...I guess it comes with the territory."
Another salient point you might want to consider, Jen - upholding the letter of the law could be plausibly argued, had you not reached that verdict in under 12 hours, jumped on the publicity train with the ABC interview, then dashed off to the ABC-funded trip to Disney World.
Jenny discloses that the initial vote for aggravated manslaughter against Casey was split 6-6 among the jurors, with Jenny herself voting for manslaughter. When Tuchman asked what persuaded her to switch her vote to not guilty, Jenny profoundly pontificated, "I think everyone will tell you the same thing. It's just a lack of hard evidence. It's just like I said - the duct tape and the chloroform and things like that - you could - if you took a hard...look at it...there was a lot of doubt surrounding all those certain things. So there's not enough to make anything stick."
Hopefully Jenny was not attempting witticism with that last sentence.
Jenny again echoed her remarks from her ABC interview, "Like, it's obviously it's not been proven that she's innocent, but it certainly hasn't been proven that she's guilty." (Please note - I don't need a visit from the Spell-Check Fairy - these are Ms Intelligentsia's exact words).
Translated - Casey's failure to report Caylee missing and Casey's 31 days of whoring it up wasn't a sufficient red flag for the jurors to perhaps ascertain motive.
According to Jenny, the jurors didn't buy Jose Baez's deplorable accusations of George Anthony molesting his daughter. Nor did they feel that Bozo and the defense team presented any hard evidence of Caylee drowning accidently in the family pool.
Let us all rejoice that Jose's flip charts with the pretty colors weren't taken into consideration by the jurors. Had they done so, they would have probably returned their not guilty verdict within 15 minutes.
So, how DID Jenny and gang render the Turbo Verdict? Tuchman queried, "So a casual viewer of this trial might say how come you didn't find her guilty of murder?"
"Because it has nothing to do with what the defense presents," Jennifer said. "It's on the prosecution to prove what - they brought charges. They have to prove with their evidence that those charges are - they can validate bringing those charges and that the crime was committed."
Jennifer, please forgive the dolts among us who feel that Caylee's skull wrapped in duct tape is powerful evidence that a crime was committed. How frivolous of the prosecution to willy-nilly charge Casey with a crime, despite the fact that Casey was the last person seen with Caylee, then making the audacious leap of assuming that Casey may have had a hand in her daughter's demise.
No, Jenny's not done educating us on her special brand of logic and reasoning used in her contribution to the verdict. While the prosecution, "...had good strong circumstantial evidence, but at the end of the day, it was circumstantial...there was not just one strong piece of evidence that said something definitively. Every piece of evidence could have kind of said this way or that way, I mean, there were many different ways you could have gone with each piece of evidence."
Except for rendering justice.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar