The Huffington Post has an article about Drew Peterson (who is charged with killing one wife and suspected of killing another wife) commenting, through his attorneys, about the Anthony acquittal. The Peterson defense team approved of the verdict, commenting, ”The jury’s job is not to act emotionally. A jury’s job is to evaluate whether or not the government has sufficient evidence, and it looks like in the Casey Anthony case they felt the government did not have sufficient evidence to prove their case.”
In the new era of online news and social media coverage, this is an interesting move. We will have to wait to see what, if any, impact these comments will have on Peterson’s trial. I probably would not have done anything to link, in any way, my client to Casey Anthony (arguably one of the most unpopular people in the world). The comments were benign and should not draw any ire. Maybe the comments caught my eye in light of the Anthony team’s use of online comments to monitor public opinion/sentiment and tailor their arguments.
As I posted last week on Twitter, we are in a new era, where social media plays a part in the preparation of high-profile trials. Perhaps the Peterson defense team knows EXACTLY what they are doing, and are trying to send a message to potential jurors to be open-minded, unemotional, and fair. If that is the case, it may end up being a brilliant move.
The question becomes, what happens to all those defendants who are going to trial on cases with NO media coverage. Is it fair that those defendants don’t have access to the media. Who knows. We’ll see. . .
No, no. . . . nothing important to report. Instead, Mark Douglas is going to chase around a guy who has to drive to make a living, who has ponied up $10K to the ex, and who spent 112 days in jail because HIS LICENSE WAS SUSPENDED FOR CHILD SUPPORT. That’s the only law he broke – driving with a suspended license. And. apparently, the current wife likes him and the ex is the only one . . . complaining (yeah, that’s the NICE word for it).
