What will come of the Casey Anthony jury?

I’ve held back from commenting on the Casey Anthony trial, fearing that the jury would get vilified if it didn’t render the “correct” verdict. Finding Anthony not guilty on the major charges did, indeed, bring a hailstorm of criticism. One of the most egregious stories in this theme was a USA Today poll that showed two-thirds of Americans think Anthony “definitely or probably murdered her daughter.”

After a few minutes of digging, I lost interest in finding the breakdown in those numbers, since thinking a criminal defendant is “probably” guilty means what exactly? In the courtroom, it means voting with the jury in this case, which found her not guilty but (as some jurors have said) still has members who think she “probably” committed the crime.

It was nice to see some thought given to how this would affect the jurors. Again, the focus of this blog is on the juror experience of service, and at least some reportage acknowledged that jurors might suffer stress as a result of this exceptional trial. It bears repeating that few jurors experience what these citizens went through; in fact, their names have been withheld indefinitely out of fear they’ll be harassed. As one St. Petersburg Times story recounts, there’s little sympathy for the juror-citizens who gave up a chunk of their lives for this trial:

After the not-guilty verdict on July 5, Russ Huekler, an alternate juror in the Casey Anthony murder trial, was hit with hundreds of insulting letters, e-mails, Facebook posts and phone calls from strangers calling him “ignorant” and “scum.”

Then the death threat arrived.

All that anger aimed at him, even though Huekler did not actually participate in deliberations. But he had voiced support on TV for the jurors who did — many of whom are coping with experiences similar to Huekler’s in the trial’s aftermath.

Maybe this just extends the civic impact of jury service: This way, citizens get to learn what it’s like not only to make tough decisions but also to be reviled by the public. Ah, democracy.


About jgastil

John Gastil is Head and Professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at The Pennsylvania State University, where he specializes in political deliberation and group decision making.
This entry was posted in Deliberation on juries, Public/media views of juries, Social/political impact of juries. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to What will come of the Casey Anthony jury?

  1. FUKC says:

    Support Caylee’s Law!

  2. Hi John–

    You might be interested in reading our behind-the-scenes piece on the Casey Anthony trial in The Jury Expert. It’s written by Richard Gabriel who was the Defense team trial consultant for more than two years. He talks about the jury system and what it takes to follow judicial instructions.

    Here’s a URL: http://www.thejuryexpert.com/2011/07/american-justice-or-american-idol-two-trials-and-two-verdicts-in-the-casey-anthony-case/


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s