2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[manatee]

it just hit me why we don't understand these jurors. Clearwater (pinellas county) is the meca for scientologist...they see the world completely different than the average american. just saying this could explain it.

 

[jojomonkey]

it just hit me why we don't understand these jurors. Clearwater (pinellas county) is the meca for scientologist...they see the world completely different than the average american. just saying this could explain it.

As others have said, there's something in the water down there. Could be something to think about. I wonder what scientology's stand on serving on a jury is. Maybe finding someone guilty stimulates the Theons, or whatever those aliens are that inhabit them.

 

[RammerJammer]

She is still listed as in custody on the Orlando County Jail database. I just checked it. :seeya:

I checked this numerous times, as I have in the past using her last/first name, with no matches found. It was driving me crazy!! I just tried it only using her last name...and, you're right, there she is! Whew! So weird to me. Sorry!

 

[Sustained]

He didn't get paid for the interview.

How do you know ? Did Bernie Grimm or Ted (Let's be Candid) Williams tell you so ?

 

[DairyGirl]

You know what? If this jury had been physically present to see (I apologize in advance for saying this so graphically) Caylee's decomposed body laying INSIDE the trunk of Casey's car, face covered with duct tape, and a jar labeled "chloroform" sitting next to it, they still would have said "DOUBT". They were seriously lacking in reasoning/deduction skills. Man would I love to see and hear what when on in that jury room.

I said it before but I believe that even if KC had stuck to her zanny story they would have acquitted her. They would have been the only people in the world who would believe that a nanny kidnapped Caylee.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

How do you know ? Did Bernie Grimm or Ted (Let's be Candid) Williams tell you so ?

Van Susteren also wrote: “We did NOT compensate the juror foreperson for his interview. He did NOT ask for anything and we did not offer him anything. We pushed him to do the interview since we figured that many Americans would like to hear from the foreperson. To give you an idea of how he felt about the interview, and his desire not to be famous, he would not let us show his face. The interview was shot over his shoulder.”

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...pay-jury-foreman-greta-van-susteren-says.html

 

[3doglady]

He didn't get paid for the interview.

All the networks say they don't pay for interviews. Then they pay for a photo and call it "a licensing fee" or use some other tactic. KC and the A's were paid "licensing fees" while the networks vehemently denied paying for the interviews. If you read Greta's payment denials, they do not include "licensing fees or rights". I specifically asked her on her blog if she paid him for a photo or a licensing fee. Her reply was "What picture?" Nice sidestep. If she hadn't she would have denied it outright.

Friday worked for CBS for 3 years. Check her posts. (I'll paraphrase) She said the networks always pay for interviews, they just word it as something else. She said now that the term "licensing fees" is known to the public they are probably calling it some else. Friday is a well known author.

 

[3doglady]

Van Susteren also wrote: “We did NOT compensate the juror foreperson for his interview. He did NOT ask for anything and we did not offer him anything. We pushed him to do the interview since we figured that many Americans would like to hear from the foreperson. To give you an idea of how he felt about the interview, and his desire not to be famous, he would not let us show his face. The interview was shot over his shoulder.”

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...pay-jury-foreman-greta-van-susteren-says.html

Exactly They did not compensate for the interview. They compensated him for something else so he would do the interview. Just like ABC. Did you see JF's photo on their website? We know for a fact that ABC pays "licensing fees" for photos.

 

[1tasha]

Because, oh look, you can't find her in the Florida database. She's not just from Florida. If you would actually listen to anything...


(Sorry, imitating casey makes me feel better).

ETA: Oh, damn. You were talking about casey and the prison database.

Ohh thank you! Made my afternoon.

 

[Sustained]

Van Susteren also wrote: “We did NOT compensate the juror foreperson for his interview. He did NOT ask for anything and we did not offer him anything. We pushed him to do the interview since we figured that many Americans would like to hear from the foreperson. To give you an idea of how he felt about the interview, and his desire not to be famous, he would not let us show his face. The interview was shot over his shoulder.”

Don't you mean infamous ? And I'm sure the reason he did not show his face was to avoid possible public backlash over the verdict and his ridiculous justification in the interview.

 

[3doglady]

Is the foreman being interviewed again tonight?

Yes, aren't we honored?

 

[dog.gone.cute]

After hearing what this juror #11 has been saying, I am convinced he forced everyone to see things his way. There was no deliberation. I am familiar with this guys type. They act over confident and all knowing, they are combative and confrontational, and easily intimidate people with their personality.

Unfortunately, the other 11 people were easily led, didn't want to take a leadership role, didn't want to challenge him, and he made them believe he knew best "oh let me read the jury instructions and just summarize for the rest of you, you won't understand anything anyway" that kind of thing...
They were just a flock of sheep.

It's not uncommon at all. Most people shy away from confrontation. I see it everyday at work, people will blindly follow someone they believe is a good leader when in fact the person is a complete tool. They are just good at appearing powerful and that is intimidating to people. But these people go unchallenged and unquestioned day after day because no one has the cajones to stand up for anything.

Personally, I want this guy to keep talking. I want all the jurors to talk, I'm hoping someone says something that will cause the state to look into possible jury tampering. I know, I know, it won't change the outcome but it would make me happy.

BBM: I totally agree !

:goodpost::goodpost::goodpost:

 

[Etilema]

Maybe someone has already mentioned this, but I am so annoyed when the foreman says the things about "we don't have to prove a motive" and "the motive presented to us by the state was very weak". He totally does not appear to understand who had to prove what.

 

[Schu7]

Van Susteren also wrote: “We did NOT compensate the juror foreperson for his interview. http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...pay-jury-foreman-greta-van-susteren-says.html

And there you have it. That Greta statement does NOT say they not pay him money. Only no money for the interview. The statement should have been, "we never paid or compensated juror #11 in any way for anything." Just a legal dodge here by FOX/Greta. And nothing else.

Maybe a bad example here, but.....
It is the same as a say, old baseball player who owes taxes. He goes to a baseball show to sign autographs. But gets no money from the organizers who use his name as a drawing card. If they paid him, the IRS would take that money. So the player turns up and signs his name to people for a cash price. An unknown untraceable amount for the IRS to try and track down. But oh, the player showed up for free and the love of the game you know. Yea, right.

 

[3doglady]

The foreman may have an agent that FOX paid. The agent may have suggested "no face" for the first interview so that his value didn't decrease for a second interview. Now that I think about it, I doubt he would have been able to come up with that brainstorm by himself. Also that would enable FOX to deny paying the foreman.

 

[back2back19]

Yes, aren't we honored?

We sure are! I have to make sure I block fox before 10 I guess.

Thanks.

 

[2goldfish]

As others have said, there's something in the water down there. Could be something to think about. I wonder what scientology's stand on serving on a jury is. Maybe finding someone guilty stimulates the Theons, or whatever those aliens are that inhabit them.

thetans!! :floorlaugh:

http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h186/xian-o/f55dc4c8b9a90ff15225bc02798c4f14.gif

 

[~n/t~]

it just hit me why we don't understand these jurors. Clearwater (pinellas county) is the meca for scientologist...they see the world completely different than the average american. just saying this could explain it.

Is it junk scientologist?

 

[mikeysmommom]

I guess JB big wrinkled pad and his markers was easier to understand then the forensic's.IMO Someone tampered with this jury nothing else makes sense to me.

 

[whiterum]

To give you an idea of how he felt about the interview, and his desire not to be famous, he would not let us show his face. The interview was shot over his shoulder.”

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...pay-jury-foreman-greta-van-susteren-says.html

Famous? Judging by the adverse reaction to the Jury's incomprehensible verdict shouldn't that be rephrased to 'his desire not to be infamous'!!


Sorry Mysterious just noticed you had posted the same thought above.