Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> Lawbeat

Legal News

: Lawbeat

Thoughts on the Thurman-stalker jury story

By Mark Obbie

Emily Steel is taking some flak for her tell-all story about serving on the jury that convicted Uma Thurman's stalker. New York's Noelle Hancock says that the A1 play is yet more proof that Rupert Murdoch really owns the Journal. Blame Murdoch if you must, but a newspaper would have to be brain dead not to publish this story, and play it prominently, once it lucked out with a reporter picked for the jury. Steel provides a smart, scene-based story about what went on in the jury room. It's a good read, with substance. But I do have two observations:A civics downside? Stories like this -- and it's certainly not the first of its type, though I can't think of other cases with this kind of celebrity victim -- seem likely to discourage lawyers from picking journalists as jurors. That would be very unfortunate, putting more distance between us and the public because we are considered ineligible for jury duty simply on the grounds that we'll splash the inside story on front pages. Does that mean we shouldn't do the stories? Emphatically no. It's our job to write about the world as we see it. And it's a competitive necessity to use what we're handed in the way of access. I'm just lamenting the possible repercussions.An overly snarky kicker?Here's how Steel ends her story:Translated: "Up yours, competitor. I'll tell you what it was like -- in the forum where I'm paid to write." Funny, maybe. But it leaves a slightly sour aftertaste.

Full post as published by Lawbeat on May 07, 2008 (boomark / email).